So a rigorous statistical analysis of the Gold Medal Winners' stamp images reveals...

[joanofarchitrave]

3/12 stamps involving female athletes show images of them in sporting action.

13/20 stamps involving male athletes show images of them in sporting action.

I know they had to pick the images fast and under pressure to produce them in time. I think, personally, it was predictable that in those conditions, the female images shown were more likely to be smiling non-threatening images, rather than photos of women in athletic extremis.

Or is this quite positive, showing women in positions of triumph rather than still in competition?

I think you are overthinking it. It wouldnt even occur to to me to investigate that kind of thing, I would just think it was great to see so many female role models with such a high profile. But perhaps I am not far enough along my feminist journey!

Its not like the women are spread across a bed in their underwear is it? They are still being celebrated for their athletic achievement.

Yes in my case it was a long dull bus journey rather than a feminist one

It's interesting joan, it fits in with the social trend of men tending to be portrayed in active roles and women in passive roles - obviously here the women aren't passive, but the men are more active. From a quick google, this old info sheet notes that "Newspaper articles about women?s sport included head shots and posed images - rather than action shots - more often than did articles about men?s sport, suggesting that women?s sports are less active." I think the stamps are likely to be an example of this trend.

The three woman in action shots were of 1. Victoria Pendleton - she was celebrating, but was on her bike with her helmet on/visor down. I wonder if the person who picked that wishes they'd picked her doing the heart to her fiance like the BBC did ad nauseam, but I'm glad they didn't.

1. The image of Jess Ennis was wonderful too - magnificent mid-hurdle shot.

1. Charlotte Dujardin in the middle of her routine - not even smiling.

Thinking about it, to be fair the mixed equestrian team shots pretty much had to be celebration shots as that's the only time the team are together. If you remove those from the stats it's 3/10 and 13/18.

Oh that was muddled - the shot of Victoria Pendleton was actually counted in the non-action shots, bugger!

Thanks for that MMM, I think it fits into that narrative as well.

I think it may be 4/12 -- the image of Charlotte Dujardin could be during competition.

Where did you find the full set of images, by the way? I'm having to try to count them up on Google Images.

There's also Jade Jones, surely?

i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/08/12/article-2187363-1484B236000005DC-424_964x715.jpg Here are all of them together I think.

It was an advert.

The action women shots are Charlotte Dujardin, Jade Jones and Jess Ennis. Sorry about confusing the issue with the Victoria Pendleton one

So a full list (I think) is

Helen Glover and Heather Stanning - In boat after winning but before medal ceremony
Katherine Grainger and Anna Watkins - Standing with medals in front of Union flag
Victoria Pendleton - Cycling after winning but before medal ceremony, holding Union flag
Katherine Copeland and Sophie Hosking - In boat after winning but before medal ceremony, standing and punching air
Danielle King, Joanna Rowsell and Laura Trott - Standing together after winning but before medal ceremony, in front of Union flag
Jessica Ennis - Mid-hurdle
Laura Bechtolsheimer, Charlotte Dujardin (and Carl Hester) - Standing with medals
Laura Trott - Kissing gold medal
Charlotte Dujardin - Seated on horse, mid-dressage
Nicola Adams - After winning but before medal ceremony with helmet and gloves off, hands raised
Jade Jones - Mid-kick

I count Charlotte Dujardin, Jade Jones and Jess Ennis as sporting action and 14 male athletes/male teams in sporting action (including Luke Campbell but wasn't quite sure if that one counted).

Yeah I wasn't sure about Luke Campbell, but in the end didn't count it as 'action' because his head protector and gloves were off. Interesting though that it's an action-type pose and non-smiling...

I know this is very minor, I just find it interesting. Thanks for joining in

Anthony Joshua - Mid-bout
Luke Campbell - After bout with helmet and gloves off, hands raised
Mo Farah - Standing (possibly running slowly?) in front of Union flag
Ed McKeever - Mid-paddle
Chris Hoy - Standing (or possibly sitting on bike) holding Union flag
(Laura Bechtolsheimer, Charlotte Dujardin and) Carl Hester - Standing with medals
Alistair Brownlee - Mid-run
Jason Kenny - On a bike in a helmet, but it doesn't appear to be moving fast and he's not crouched low over handlebars so could be just after event?
Scott Brash, Peter Charles, Ben Maher and Nick Skelton - Standing with medals
Andy Murray - Mid-stroke
Ben Ainslie - On a boat after race, holding Union flag
Greg Rutherford - Mid-jump
Alex Gregory, Pete Reed, Tom James and Andrew Triggs Hodge - Mid-row (probably? They are in the boat, but could be just before or after race)
Ed Clancy, Geraint Thomas, Peter Kennaugh and Steven Burke - Mid-race
Chris Hoy, Jason Kenny and Philip Hindes - Mid-race
Peter Wilson - Mid-shot
Etienne Stott and Tim Baillie - Mid-paddle
Bradley Wiggins - On a bike in a helmet, but it doesn't appear to be moving (at all?) so could be just before or after event?

So I count 3 out of 11 female poses as actually mid-event, probably 9 or 10 out of 19 male poses mid-event.

But then what you count as "action" is subjective after that. Luke Campbell and Nicola Adams have been photographed under similar circumstances, but he has a neutral expression and is doing typical "boxer" pose while she's smiling and holding up "Number 1" fingers -- I think if we class his pose as "action" and hers as "not action" that's actually reflecting our own assumptions as much as anything else (from their interviews Nicola Adams seems to be a naturally smiley person whereas Luke Campbell doesn't... is that about gender or is it just them as people?). Is someone just before a race "action" and someone just after "not action"? Or the other way around? Or are they both "action", or neither? I don't think there's a single right answer.

Still more men than women pictured in the thick of their event, though, no doubt about that.

Interesting - c 25-30% vs 45-50% action shots. Not sure it's enough to infer a bias to passivity, I'm thinking that it may be a bias to showing womens' faces/smiles.

Just be grateful we didn't win gold in womens beach volleyball though :o

By the way, what I do like is the sheer number of women medal winners this time round. Strong argument for funding womens sports like, oh, football :o

Most people (in my opinion) are overthinking this to death, if you have to work this hard to find sexism then it probably isn't there. There are enough real instances of sexism in our country/world that people do not need to imagine more where there isn't any.

Whatmeworry "Strong argument for funding womens sports like, oh, football" I read this as saying you believe more women's sports should be funded as men's football is? I should point out that the majority of the Olympic sports athletes are "funded" by Sports UK, who get their money from the national lottery. Men's football is not funded, it is a completely private sector institution, the two cases are completely separate. Although if I have misunderstood your statement I apologise.

StewieGriffinsMom Outside of a feminism board I would imagine that ~99% of people would agree that counting the proportion of each gender in action and postulating gender discrimination from it would be over-thinking it (which I fully concede does not mean it isn't so).

For the record, I believe the choice of image of each athlete was selected for their iconic value, whether the athlete in question was mid-event or not, whether the athlete was male or female, a fact which I have no problem with.

Whatmeworry "Strong argument for funding womens sports like, oh, football" I read this as saying you believe more women's sports should be funded as men's football is? I should point out that the majority of the Olympic sports athletes are "funded" by Sports UK, who get their money from the national lottery. Men's football is not funded, it is a completely private sector institution

Now you're overtyhinking it, my point was that women have done very well this year, and the spend on their sports should be rewarded - and I couldn't help making a comparison about the relative levels of performance in the mens and women's football teams in the Olympics....

But maybe there is a deeper comment there about the way British men's football is funded given British men's football's (especially England's) relatively poor performance on the international stage for the money and prestifge it gets..... the uptick in GB Olympic performance vds decades long poor footballing performance makes a rather stark contrast, no?

"about the way British men's football is funded given British men's football's (especially England's) relatively poor performance on the international stage for the money and prestifge it gets"

What I was saying in my original post Whatmeworry is that unlike running, rowing, cycling etc., men's football is not funded. Men's football get's it's money from the fans who pay for merchandise, match tickets etc whereas the majority of olympic sports and athletes receive funding through the national lottery. That is the difference here and why comparing money between the two is irrelevant (and why before now Britain didn't enter the Olympic football tournaments).

As to your other point that "my point was that women have done very well this year, and the spend on their sports should be rewarded" I completely agree, but you seem to be under the illusion that the female Olympic athletes receive less funding than the men do (football aside, since as i pointed out, this sport is not a funded sport as the other olympic sports are). Each event/athlete is funded by it's past success and their potential for future success. For example Vicky Pembleton receives the same funding level as Chris Hoy does(both elite cyclists), but Jessica Ennis(pentathlon gold medal winner) received greater funding than Peter Wilson(double trap gold medal winner) did in the build up to Olympics since she was seen as having greater medal winning potential than he did, and since her sport is more high profile.

I know exactly how men's football is funded, thank you - and how much it gets - and how crap its global performance is. They are all easily verifiable facts.

And Olympic funding is not a static thing, where there is success, in theory more money follows. And women have been very succesful this year, ergo the point I made.....

And I hope Peter Wilson is re-funded, it was shameful that he had to take another country's money. And I think the British Men's Taekwondo situation was appallling, and England's football team are actually the best in the world evah, just desperately unlucky all the time...

There, have I done enough Menz appeasement now?

"There, have I done enough Menz appeasement now?"

Do yourself a favour and grow up. Disagreeing with you is no reason to spout such nonsense, if you are on the wrong side of an argument then change sides, don't resort to such sh1t just because you feel that you can't be wrong.

Sigh, let's try this again:
"And Olympic funding is not a static thing, where there is success, in theory more money follows. And women have been very succesful this year, ergo the point I made....."
Women athletes are currently required to meet the exact same criteria as their male counterparts are for funding. There is no gender imbalance in this. Those female athletes that do well receive more funding, those that don't receive less, exactly as the men do. Why is it so incomprehensible to you that this is the case? Why do you assume that female athletes HAVE to be receiving less funding than male athletes?

There is no gender imbalance in this. Those female athletes that do well receive more funding, those that don't receive less, exactly as the men do. Why is it so incomprehensible to you that this is the case? Why do you assume that female athletes HAVE to be receiving less funding than male athletes?

Where did i say that they get less funding? My point was that they have a strong argument for extra funding.

You seem to be mightily het up about this all....is it British women doing well at sport, or British men being crap at football that is getting you all upset (or both)

And for the record, British men's "elite" football is nearly bankrupt, the game increasingly has to rely on foreign billionaires or massive (anf eventually unaffordable) debt funding. Manchester United's attempt at a US pulblic offering flopped last week.

"Where did i say that they get less funding? My point was that they have a strong argument for extra funding"

By stating that they have an argument to get extra funding means that you think they don't get enough right now. The system currently works by rewarding successful athletes and lowering funding to unsuccessful ones regardless of gender, to single out female athletes from this system by unilaterally saying females should get more funding is sexist.

"You seem to be mightily het up about this all....is it British women doing well at sport, or British men being crap at football that is getting you all upset (or both)"

What I am mightily het (sic?) up about is being insulted by you (the menz nonsense). I do not like people that have to resort to insults to deflect away from the fact that they are losing an argument, it shows such ignorance, unintelligence and disrespect.

As for your strawman arguments, I am happy female athletes are doing better, it gives me more good athletes/sports to watch, and for the record I can guarantee you I watch a lot more female sports than you do, at no point in any of my posts did I ever say anything against female sports/athletes. No British football fan cares that the clubs are in debt, the foreign billionaires buy the clubs and run them at a loss so the British teams can have the best players from around the world playing in our teams.