gymnastics, floor

[PassiveAgressiveQueen]

I have been watching the gymnastics on telly. Last night was the mens, the floor routine was impressive, no element of choreography at all, just strong men bouncing around.
Whereas the women's is dancing,music and damn strong women bouncing around the floor.

Is this sexist?

I don't think it's fair to say that the women don't get to show off their strength, it's just different to the way the men do. I prefer woman's gymnastics because IMO it's more well rounded and not just about power. A bit like women's tennis.

I've known a number of GB gymnasts, the women were some of the best athletes I've ever seen. Strong, quick, flexible, agile. Very impressive.

I thought that men's and women's gymnastics were different because he sport is designed to show off what the body can do & men's and women's bodies are different. Men use apparatus which requires a lot of upper body strength because they tend to have more upper body strength. Men would find it very hard to do the beam because they are larger than women and falling would be very unpleasant! I don't know why women perform routines to music though.

I think gymnastics is one sport where both men and women can perform. Why would you want women to do what the men do, but not as well as them? Why not have them doing something they can do better?

Incidentally, gymnastics has long been viewed as a "women's sport"; why change it so women are doing what the men do? That seems far more sexist to me.

However, I don't know why leotards are worn. From what I remember, leotards are horrible uncomfortable garments. Leggings would be much better. I think clothes have to be tight though, like diving, so you can see what the body is doing.

I think the age you stop doing gym can depend on what apparatus you do. I would argue that the bars require more upper body strength than the other women's apparatus, which is why Beth Tweddle was still winning medals at the grand old age of 27. But I don't think she would have won medals on the beam or floor at that age when it's more about flexibility. Ditto for the men - much more about strength so they can go on for longer.

The differences are historical. At the start of the last century women danced about a bit on the apparatus while men were more acrobatic.

With Nadia came change- then the Russians in the 80's started doing the men's tricks, and women's gymnastics became all about the difficulty and strength. Interestingly many in the gymnastics world think women's gymnastics should be trying to be more artistic, with more dance, rather than just try to emulate men.

Women tend to be younger because after puberty strength to weight ratio changes. So they need to learn the really difficult stuff young, as it's too hard to be learning it, and keeping up with strength as your body is changing and growing. Men hit peak strength:weight after puberty, so they learn the hard stuff later, plus there's less pounding on the body at a young age, so their bodies last longer.

The older gymnasts tend to be event specialists- discussing on one or two apparatus, as it's less stress on the body, they don't need to train so many hours, and their careers last longer.

I think it would be easy to design a less revealing garment for the women, that would not restrict their performance in any way. I think I am right in saying that, in other sports, money is spent on optimising fabrics and kit so that it allows the best performance - in cycling, for example, Sky have spent a lot of money on making their kit work as well as possible for their cyclists, and rugby shirts are clearly designed now, with the modern game in mind - bits of the shirt that look grippy, for in the scrum, and tight fitting fabrics so it's harder to grab a handful of shirt and pull someone down when you tackle them. Not to mention breathability of fabrics.

Given all the science and design knowhow in the sports kit industry, I am sure it would be possible to design a beautiful, practical leotard that didn't ride up at the back, and didn't mandate waxing at the front, but didn't impede the gymnasts' performance or stop the judges seeing their lines and body shapes in the moves.

I admit I'd enjoy the men's gymnastics more if it incorporated more dance and stuff, men showing off muscles alone doesn't impress me much! Someone upthread said about dancing being perceived as a female domain in our culture with its toxic grunt-grunt view of masculinity, which is clearly rot. Think cossack dancing, or Michael Flatley's irish, or indeed any traditional folk. Men bring a great deal of energy into dance which is wonderful to watch.

The ballet thing, women dancers are usually petite because they are selected primarily on looks over talent (honestly, there used to be enough would-be ballerinas that the few companies have their pick) and there are specific height restrictions which preserve the traditional male/ female domains for all those traditional hero-rescues-heroine-in-distress ballets. Modern dance does question the roles, but they're still there. Performance art unfortunately, aesthetics matters.

Perhaps body shape and figure over talent would be more appropriate terms than looks for dancer selection.

Leotards are cut like they are to enhance leg lines.

Shorts, leggings, biketards etc just don't have the same aesthetic look. You'd be ok if you were naturally build long and leggy, but you'd bias against the shorter powerful girls.

Honestly, leotards haven't evolved to show off the female form, but to show of athletic lines and increase scoring potential, as well as safety- fabrics slip so leggings etc aren't as safe.

For another take on women's rights in gymnastics, look up the Muslim Malay girl who won at the Asian games this year. If gymnasts feel comfortable in a leotard, it's safe and makes them feel good, then why shouldn't they?

But why don't men wear leotards high cut to enhance their leg lines? Their shorts and jogging bottoms don't seem to impede their safe use of the equipment.

Because men's gymnastics tends to be more about strength than aesthetics.

I think my issue with the dance bits in the women's floor routines are that they are so obviously and uncomfortably just stuck on. The dance does not appear to be properly incorporated into the whole.
If men and women were required to involve syncopated involved dance into the whole it would be amazing.

YY, they're not dancers, they are gymnasts. Some of the gymnasts do the dance elements well, others look a bit forced. But it's the gymnastics I want to watch, not how well they can dance.

Agree, so let's just have the gymnastics.

Plus the dance moves all seem the same. Floaty arm, flicky hand, a little wiggle. In fact the only ones I really like are the ones that do something different, like Claudia Fragapane and the American that won last night, Serena Biles.

One of my DCs did gymnastics to quite a high level. She was - still is - tiny, but believe me she was awesomely, jaw droppingly strong. T'was most amusing, when she retired from gymnastics, to notice the men when she went to her gym looking sideways at her when she was bench pressing or doing other weight lifting moves. You could see their think bubbles saying "bloody hell - I can't even lift that much".

Another thing - I think that actually the beam and the asymmetric bars are potentially more dangerous than the men's high bars and the parallel bars.

And another thing.. talking of the flappy, fiddly, bum sticky out stuff. Reminds me of the old saying about Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers. She did everything just as he did but backwards in high heels.

The sport has moved on tremendously since I remember watching Olga Korbut do the first ever back somersault on the beam.

Agree about the fiddly hand/graceful stuff though. Adds nothing to the performance really.

I see where you're coming from OP. Tbh I feel the same way about figure skating - apparently it's in the rule book that the women have to do those crotch-flashing moves.

I think some female gymnasts are better at the dance elements than others. This is from 1996 and is very 'dancey' but does still show a huge amount of strength, IMHO.

Britains current top junior- well known for her artistry...

m.youtube.com/watch?v=gpkuWVhR4LE

I think the women/girls could wear little fitted shorts. No need to have leotards showing half their arse anyway. Some are cut much better than others. Glad to see that most of them look strong and fit now, but there was on on last night who looked so skinny it made me wince. 19 years old and she looked like she hadn't been through puberty. Made me want to feed her hearty food and cake.

Rhythmic gymnastic have worn catsuits etc in the past.