#strongisbeautiful

[Maaate]

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/team-gb-rugby-stars-rugby-sevens-paris-olympics-tokyo-b1168015.html

Because prancing about in your pants is really going to encourage teenage girls to continue with sport

I just saw this on X, knew there would be a thread on here! Agree it's awful. Why on earth did they agree to it? Maybe being young they buy into all of that, is all I can think of.

I can't think of anything less likely to encourage my young teen dd to take up a new sport. Such a shame, a really wasted opportunity for what could have been an amazing campaign (anyone remember This Girl Can? That was brilliant).

I think it’s less “prancing about in your pants” and more normalising the idea that female bodies don’t just look like the bodies young women are seeing on Love Island or among influencers, but that being muscular, strong and solidly built are just as much female body characteristics. Weight and strength training, for example, are some of the most valuable forms of exercise can women can do for their long term health; yet women are hugely underrepresented in them and a big factor in that is fear of “looking like a man” because we’re so used to seeing undressed female bodies that are almost invariably thin and waifish or with a focus on big boobs and big bums.

It’s not a perfect advertising campaign and there can definitely be criticism of it; but nearly-naked female bodies in the public eye aren’t going away any time soon, and I’d much prefer that young women were having an opportunity to see a far wider variety of them as admirable and attractive.

@ComtesseDeSpair Totally get what you're saying and agree with the idea - but do they have to actively sexualise it? The lingerie they are wearing looks like it came from Ann Summers. Not particularly empowering.

I suppose the reality is we live in a world where bodies are sexualised; and if the only bodies young women (and men) see in sexy underwear and touted as sexy are created through starvation or silicone, they never really have an opportunity to associate peak fitness and muscle with sexy in the same way. Young people broadly want to be sexy and found attractive by their peers, so we need to work with the tools we have.

@ComtesseDeSpair It's just the wrong approach entirely, though.
You're right that we live in a world where bodies are sexualised, but we can challenge that rather than leaning into and celebrating it.

There are much better ways of getting girls interested in weight/ strength training than parading women around in tacky erotic lingerie. Just not necessary and you would never see a man doing it.

So it seems that it's actually a lingerie company marketing thing that just happens to feature the rugby players (so basically its primary aim is to advertise underwear). But yeah, not great.

It's a shame because rugby is the sport where body diversity is probably greatest (albeit not 7's because no front row) and you see a lot of girls joining at U12/14 who don't play more traditional sports and actually find a tribe and get self-esteem from using their size to win scrums. This might actually put them off rather than encourage them.

They can do that in lycra sports gear, though.

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.

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

Not particularly empowering.

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

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.

Awful. 😞

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.)

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.