Olympic gymnastics humiliates and infantilises grown adult women

[Thebellofstclements]

The ridiculous leotards, the twee hairstyles. Having to do the ridiculous flicky "dance" moves (artistic expression, ha!) and grinning inanely (insanely) in between moves and when presenting...
Arguably the best athletes in the world but these grown adult women have to present themselves in a ridiculous, almost grotesquely infantile manner, looking fairy cheap and tacky.
The men do not.
My family argues that the gymnasts choose to do this.
We know that historically female gymnasts have been abused with no voice, so I'm not convinced this is all what they would necessarily choose given the option. AIBU?

I don't disagree with what you're saying. The Russians are backing what they're good at, agreed.

I wouldn't massively rate Biles artistry, but that's comparing her with the greats from long ago, which maybe isn't fair. She more than makes up for that with her skills and execution however. Also her presence, which is special.

Very very strange 'logic'.
Yes lets keep sexualising and infantalising girls, because if they are not simpering and exposing themselves they are behaving like men🙄
Quite bizarre

I have never seen an elite gymnast “simper.”

Why do you feel a need to insult women?

Your statement assumes women gymnasts have to simper and expose themselves. They don't. They don't even have to smile and wear leotards, though most do these things.

I don't consider a thigh extending up to a buttock uncovered during sporting activity exposure. But every culture has different norms as to what areas of women's flesh can be seen without scandal.

I really am not willing to accept that bare legs and a lack of full buttock coverage = sexualisation. I am happy for women who want to cover more to have other options, certainly.

"I really am not willing to accept that bare legs and a lack of full buttock coverage = sexualisation. I am happy for women who want to cover more to have other options, certainly.'
😂😂
I have a huge bridge to sell you.

You are so desperate for there to be no sexism that you’re completely twisting my words.

The reality of the world is that everything besides domestica - including and sometimes especially sport - has been the male sphere. That’s reality.

Society, the media, popular culture- they’ve always colluded in this, and women’s sport has been derided and regarded as lesser. Again - reality.

That does not mean that I, personally, regard women as poor imitations of men, either in sport or anywhere else. Obviously.

Your twisting of words is a bit like me saying ‘Women are paid less than men and exploited in the workplace’ and you coming along and saying “Oooooh, you think women are worth less than men.” I’d just be describing reality - and you’d be, well, doing you.

Are male and female gymnasts required to do the exact same things?! No. Are the women scrutinised in ways the men aren’t, whether ‘officially’ or by the public? You’re determined the answer is no, but everyone knows this is not the case.

You’ve said you have no daughters. I now believe you. There are some mothers of boys who will argue black is white rather than acknowledge sexism.

No, women aren't slightly crap men. But the sequins and dance moves are pandering to a feminine stereotype

Go on, then.

The reality of the world is that everything besides domestica - including and sometimes especially sport - has been the male sphere. That’s reality.

But this particular sport hasn't. It's one of the very few where women are the default. Thats reality.

You may not have known this at the start of the thread, but you do now. Yet you still persist in your framing of men's gymnastics as the norm and the women as getting the shit end of the stick.

In some cultures, some of the time

Dance is universal. Fashion is fickle. Most women's gymnastics fans are women.

Why can’t women like and engage in stereotypically feminine things? Is there something wrong with feminine things?

The extra scrutiny of women is what people on this thread are objecting to. Because gymnastics has arguably the world's most dominant sportswoman ever right now.

She likes sparkles. She likes power-dressing. She prefers leotards to unitards because she likes to have the full length of her leg uncovered when she performs. She does her hair the way she likes it.

The world's most successful sportswoman ever, most likely.

And we have a thread full of misconceptions, ignorant assumptions, and criticism of her, and her peers', clothing style.

Of course there is sexism in gymnastics. There's a hell of a lot of sexism on this thread, too.

Who's out there asking Tom Daley to cover up?

You’ve said you have no daughters. I now believe you. There are some mothers of boys who will argue black is white rather than acknowledge sexism.

When have I ever suggested there is no such thing as sexism? 🫠

But (for the fiftieth time) this is a sport that understands that women have different strengths and leans into that instead of positioning women as less good men. So why do you have an issue with that?

It's fantastic that women's gymnastics is considered more engaging and important than the men's. But that doesn't cancel out the fact that women's gymnastics has quite possibly the worst history of physical, sexual and psychological abuse of any Olympic sport. This includes some of the very athletes competing in these games.

Some of the posts on this thread are a great example of the extra scrutiny aimed at sportswomen.

When men participate in a sport where they're the standard, this goes unremarked on. It's normal. Artistic gymnastics is one of the few sports where women have that, and so the woman specific version of the sport has to be the crappier and inferior one.

Yes, but that is an entirely separate point from the one being discussed there. That poster thinks that the differing artistry requirements in men's and women's artistic gymnastics mean that the women's is the inferior version. They have not been batshit enough to claim that's why Larry Nassar did what he did, and that it would all have been fine if women did pommel horse instead of dance on floor.

But that doesn't cancel out the fact that women's gymnastics has quite possibly the worst history of physical, sexual and psychological abuse of any Olympic sport. This includes some of the very athletes competing in these games.

You could make that argument for many sports, but I am not going to deny that awful stuff has happened in this one.

There are many and complex reasons for that sad fact. However the style of presentation of gymnastic elements and sequins on hair grips are not among them.

Regardless of what anyone thinks about gymnastics and its history, can we appreciate Biles immense talent and love of her sport?

And no, I do not want to see her do pommels, firstly because pommels are really fucking boring and secondly because her strengths as a female athlete are much better showcased on the apparatus she does now.

I wasn't saying that sequins are the reason why female gymnasts have been abused. That would be insane.

I was replying to this comment:
framing of men's gymnastics as the norm and the women as getting the shit end of the stick

Female gymnasts absolutely have had the shit end of the stick and there's no point trying to deny that. The tiny sequined leotards are not the cause, they are a symptom of a sport that has historically been heavily focused on "beauty".

This talks about artistry in the olympics and the screen shot says in British gymnastics men aren’t scored on it but women are.

www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna158078

That is a serious point and I would like to give a serious answer.

One of the reasons the OP bothers me so much is that I know a great deal about that history, and about recent challenging and soul-searching. Gymnasts themselves led the way in challenging a prevailing culture where women deferred to male coaches, served their nations, and stepped down as they grew into adults.

If there are two teams that have challenged and disrupted that culture especially, they are Brazil and the USA. These are teams of adults. They are adults who support their fellow gymnasts across national boundaries. They have spoken up against sexism, ab.se, online abuse and bullying. They have asserted their autonomy regarding routines, schedules, sponsorship deals, and yes, fashion.

These were the sparkliest of the teams in show yesterday. They are the people posting on social media about their right to enjoy food. They talk about being proud of their achievements, comfortable with mistakes, supportive of each other's mental health. They design (Brazil) and collaborate (USA) their own leotards. They are proud of their bodies. They work hard on their artistry - for Brazil this is world-beating, and it is work!

They love sparkles. I don't. They have chosen to wear them. I am thrilled for them. If I don't accept some middle aged man getting to undermine their choices and bodily autonomy, why would I do it myself.

They deserve more respect than some of the sneering and body policing on this thread.

You misunderstood the conversation you were replying to there, then. It was specifically about the artistry requirements in women's gymnastics as compared to men's. The poster I disagreed with was talking about that, not abuse.

That article isnt very clearly written. If you notice, the body of the text only talks about artistry deductions. The start value itself is built through the most difficult skills included and any bonuses from linking them.

There are skill values for what was once loosely called 'dance moves' like leaps, spins and balance elements, but these are very difficult elements to execute, not just niceties, perhaps that's what the vague headline is talking about.

Pandering?

It sounds as though you just want women to dress and act like men.

I can't think when I last wore a dress. I have never worn make up. I'm far from the feminine ideal. But I know I'm not typical. Womens gymnastics is it's own sport. It doesn't derive from the men's competition, it plays to the strengths of women's bodies. It's about feminine strength, and if a bunch of feminine women want to have some sparkles on their leotards, they have every right to. And if they have developed a routine that involves using their bodies' gracefulness to move from one skill to another, rather than just jumping or stepping like the men, then why not?

These things aren't stereotypes. They're playing to strengths and showing the competitors strengths. For the record there are far fewer dance elements on today's for routines than there were a couple of decades ago. And as I said right at the beginning if this discussion, I didn't see any performative smiles. All I saw were faces in steely concentration, and the occasional grin after a faultless performance.

Men don't have artistry deductions. They have execution deductions that cover some (but not all) of the same ground. Two of women's events (beam and floor) have artistry deductions. They are only really possible in events with scope for pause and movement between scored elements.

So in terms of body shape, posture, toe pointing, leg form, extension etc, men and women are treated the same. Men don't do beam. Moving your body to a rhythm, with varied choreography is a skill on beam, and a difficult one. It's about showing how rapidly you can move and how well you can balance.

Floor is the big difference. That BG site is out of date / vague. The main music deduction you can get is for not having any, but that's not an artistic deduction. Music on floor means that rhythm and expressiveness are judged. You can argue with that if you want to, but it's a known and established feature of the sport. Men of course use music in other sports, but gymnastics for men and women are independent sports which have evolved separately.