While watching the Olympic gymnasts this week, I couldn’t ignore the differences between the men’s and the women’s competitions. I’m not talking about the myriad apparatuses; I’m talking about the uniforms and routines. Even if you’re not familiar with the sport, it doesn’t take long to see the differences. The men wear tanks tops and shorts or tights, depending on the apparatus, and perform technical routines that focus on their strength and ability. The women wear shiny high-cut leotards embellished with diamantes and perform routines that are partly technical ability, partly dance, flourish and pomp. From a spectator’s perspective, it seems women’s gymnastics is mostly about making things pretty, while men’s gymnastics is mostly about skill.
When the Olympics are on, I’m usually glued to the TV for the duration of the games. The Tokyo games are no exception. If anything, I’m watching them even more, with constant races, competitions and relays churning away on mute while I work from home during lockdown. With very limited athletic abilities myself, I find the athletes incredible. Their strength, endurance, skill and flexibility are completely beyond me. But it frustrates me to see the disparities in gender expectations in certain sports.
This month, the Norwegian women’s beach handball team were fined just under $2500 for wearing bike shorts instead of bikini bottoms at the European Championships. The fine was issued for their ‘improper clothing’ which was ‘not according to the rules of the Athlete Uniform Regulations defined in the IHF [International Handball Federation] beach handball rules of the game’. I’m no expert on beach handball, but I’m pretty sure bike shorts and bikini bottoms are equally acceptable attire and don’t necessarily sway the outcome of the game. Especially since the decision to wear the shorts came after an unsuccessful campaign to change the rules in the first place.
When rules are broken, fines are issued—I have no problem with this. What I take issue with, like the Norwegian team, are the rules in the first place. According to the IHF Athlete Uniform Regulations:
The men’s tank tops must be sleeveless and close fitting, and respect the space for the required brandings. The women’s tops (a midriff design) must be close fitting as well, with deep cutaway armholes on the back, always respecting the space for the required brandings. T-shirts that are worn under the team’s official tank top are not allowed. (90)
As for the bottom half:
The [men’s] shorts, if not too baggy, can be longer but must remain 10 centimetres above the kneecap. Female athletes must wear bikini bottoms [. . .] with a close fit and cut on an upward angle toward the top of the leg. The side width must be of a maximum of 10 centimetres. (91)
The regulations then go on to discuss sponsor logos at length, before displaying diagrams of the approved uniforms. However, no justification or reasoning for the disparity in coverage for men and women is given anywhere in the regulations. Reading these regulations, it seems sponsorships matter more than the comfort of the athletes.
Historically, women athletes were made to cover up as much as possible. Tennis players from the 1900 Paris Olympics wore corsets, ankle-length skirts and high-neck shirts with full sleeves and a tie, while gymnasts from the 1908 London Olympics wore knee-length culottes and long-sleeve shirts—hardly practical for the sport. These ‘feminine’ uniforms were allegedly designed to ‘attract a potential husband rather than enhance their athleticism’.
As a child I wore leggings and T-shirts to my gymnastics and dance training sessions because that was what I felt comfortable wearing. When it came to competitions, leotards always made me feel self-conscious—even in my pre-pubescent, scrawny body. I never understood why they were compulsory. I knew I could do all of my routines in leggings, so why did I have to wear a leotard when everyone’s eyes were on me? The embarrassment was enough for me to give up the sport, and that was without the unflattering camera angles and endless slow-motion replays Olympic gymnasts are subject to.
The sexualisation of women athletes isn’t new. Beach volleyball certainly has a reputation for double standards and the sexualisation of women for the male gaze. The gymnastics world has also been associated with sexual assault, with the former USA team doctor Larry Nassar currently serving out a 175-year sentence for his abuse. But this year, gymnasts are fighting back.
The German women’s gymnastics team stepped out at the European Artistic Gymnastics Championship this year wearing unitards that covered their bodies from their wrists to their ankles. ‘We wanted to show that every woman, everybody, should decide what to wear,’ said team member Elisabeth Seitz.
Akilah Carter-Francique, the executive director for the Institute for the Study of Sport, Society and Social Change at San José State University says athletes need to be able to ‘bring their full selves into the space and not have to be concerned about how they look, or whether they are being objectified in these spaces of participation and competition.’ Thankfully, the German’s unitards were within the uniform regulations, so the gymnasts weren’t penalised for wearing them.
These examples of defiance further alienate archaic dress codes and put the pressure on sports federations to change. All athletes should feel comfortable so that they can perform at their best, and regulations and dress codes need to allow for that. Many sports have made allowances for cultural or religious beliefs, but when it comes to the comfort and objectification of female athletes, there’s a lot of catching up to do.
Kate Fleming is a creative writer and freelancer from Melbourne with a special interest in sustainability, ethical fashion and women's experiences. She is the founder and editor of the Mindful Materialist Blog and has had her work published in Peppermint Magazine. You'll often find her perusing vintage stores and adding to her collection of books and house plants.