Men vs Women gymnastics-why different clothes/moves?

[Lady Marmalade]

7 minutes ago, wintermom said:

My goodness. Don't you ever exercise and get heated up? There is a function to athletic clothing. It's a mind-set like you are expressing here that made it so challenging for female athletes to finally shed layers and layers of clothing so that they could actually move and be comfortable while active. 

If it was so important for people to see women's athletics for ANY reason, there would be a lot more of it on TV. There isn't. The money and TV coverage goes to men's sports.

Right?! On the one hand we've been saying since the 70's that women should learn to be comfortable in their own skin, that it doesn't matter what is on the outside but on the inside.  And then in the next breath we tell them to cover up because their running attire makes US uncomfortable.  That's a terrible double standard. 

[EmseB]

58 minutes ago, Bluegoat said:

The whole fashion industry is sexualising of women, for profit.  This is not something that is just about individuals having dirty minds.  It goes on throughout a lot of the media, advertising, etc.

If it didn't trickle down to people's choices in daily clothing, at the beach, at work, playing sports, they'd stop, because it would no longer be profitable.

I am kind of shocked that this aspect of the fashion/music/tv industry is news to people.

Why are you willing to dismiss what anyone has said about form and function of some of these things? You're talking about fashion/music/tv and a lot of people are talking about various aspects of the sport that might lend themselves to tight clothing, or less clothing, or more clothing depending on the case.

I get that there is a lot of this out there, but there are also plenty of stores I can go to right now where I can buy conservative, modest clothing and still look at least current if not trendy. Target, Old Navy, Banana Republic, most department stores etc., etc.

That goes for sportswear as well, but to be honest, my choice in swimwear and beachwear and workout gear has nothing to do with modesty and everything to do with how comfortable I feel and how well I can move around in the water and hangout on the sand. How is it any better to watch women athletes and tsk tsk them for what they are wearing, than to ogle them for what they are wearing? It's two sides to the same coin. I do think if someone is watching gymnastics and they are only looking at the gymnasts butts, it doesn't matter if they are fretting about them or ogling them, it's inappropriate either way. Do you think bra tops for women's volleyball should be banned? Should they be required to cover a certain amount of skin?

You're completely dismissing athleticism and function because you think everyone is brainwashed into wanting all the women to wear sexy stuff? Women are too dumb to know what they want to wear while working out or competing because they've succumbed to the fashion industry? I can almost guarantee that more thought has gone into the performance of any given leotard, bra, or short than what it looks like. As pointed out earlier, this is why men are now more covered up in swimming (and women too) rather than wearing ever skimpier suits. It's why women basket ball players wear bigger fitting shorts and tank tops, or why women skiers and snowboarders basically dress the same as the men. If it was all about sexiness and women in particular, things would look a lot different than they do now in most sporting events.

[maize]

I wonder what would happen if the fashion industry presented men and women with clothing that was equivalent in coverage and tightness as a general rule?

Because often that is not happening. None of us makes our clothing choices in a vacuum, nor do most of us design and sew our own clothes. We "choose" to wear what society and the fashion industry make available and tell us  wear.

And often that involves tighter and more revealing clothes for women than for men. Does anyone really believe this is just because women must all have an innate preference for tighter and more revealing clothes, or because the function of clothing for a given activity is significantly different for women than for men?

[maize]

Personally I find evening dress to be the most blatant instance of this phenomenon. 

[Bluegoat]

If someone could tell me why men in volleyball, running, at the gym, skating, etc, don't wear crop tops, bun huggers, etc, in anything like the same numbers as women, I might be inclined to think there was something other than fashion reasons involved.  

But it's always the argument with the sexualisation of fashion that women just happen to like that sort of thing, because it's more comfortable, or empowering, or whatever. 

Individuals, persons, feeling a choice is utilitarian or just personal preference doesn't really tell us much about why there is a social difference of this type.  It's like saying that the only reason there are fewer women in politics is because they prefer not to go into politics.  Except there is even less reason in this case to find that plausible.

[Lady Marmalade]

 Last I checked, most men don't have BOOKS that require the support that a bra top provides.   And my D-cup DD certainly isn't going to do a workout without those girls snug as a bug in a rug. 

Most women aren't running around in a jock strap either...  Different equipment for different physical attributes.   

[Bluegoat]

Just now, Lady Marmalade said:

 Last I checked, most men don't have BOOKS that require the support that a bra top provides.   And my D-cup DD certainly isn't going to do a workout without those girls snug as a bug in a rug. 

Most women aren't running around in a jock strap either...  Different equipment for different physical attributes.   

 

I've not generally seen any men running around in just a jock-strap. 

If the issue was really having less clothes is universally better, I'd expect to see men wearing as small a shirt as possible, or no shirt.  Yet that's a fair bit less common, and in official sports outfits you generally only see it in swimming.  

[EmseB]

14 minutes ago, maize said:

I wonder what would happen if the fashion industry presented men and women with clothing that was equivalent in coverage and tightness as a general rule?

Because often that is not happening. None of us makes our clothing choices in a vacuum, nor do most of us design and sew our own clothes. We "choose" to wear what society and the fashion industry make available and tell us  wear.

And often that involves tighter and more revealing clothes for women than for men. Does anyone really believe this is just because women must all have an innate preference for tighter and more revealing clothes, or because the function of clothing for a given activity is significantly different for women than for men?

I get that if you only shop certain places or view certain media, but I have honestly never had a problem finding clothing that is modest and appropriate for an occasion, or sexy if I want it to be (including evening dresses). There is such a huge variety of places to buy stuff now every time I go to a military ball there's everything from covered up from the neck down, to slit up to here, to tight and fitted, to flowy and billowy, too mass cleavage to books covered up completely and draped with a scarf and...everything in between. I get that the Kardashians are wearing latex outfits or whatever, but it's not like women can't dress as they please. Of course it's not a vacuum, but there's so much out there to choose from. They can even dress like men if they want to in suits and button up shirts. I just can't buy that this is a thing when I can go to 20 different stores and come out with 20 different styles based on how much I want to reveal, how sexy or professional I want to dress, how young or old I want to look, etc. Yes, it's all made by someone else, but I can craft almost whatever style I want within a HUGE range of options.

Right now I'm wearing jeans and sweatshirt. To church I always have cute dresses that are at or below the knee and don't show cleavage. If I'm going on a date with DH I might have a lower cut top or a shorter skirt. If I'm going for an interview I have a dark suit with an oxford shirt or pretty blouse that covers everything. Do people really think we (women) don't have options? Or have to dress in revealing, tight clothing because fashion industry in media?

But, I mean, men's and women's clothing are always going to accentuate different features at certain levels because men and women have inherently different body types. I would really be bummed if the standard for women's clothing was men's clothing because...I don't want to dress the same as a man. At the gym or elsewhere. I need clothing that has room for curves. And I don't want broad shoulders. And maybe every now and then I want a v-neck or peplum top.

I was actually thinking about this because what if women wore the tank tops that men do in gymnastics? Hello, side book! Or at least a serious eyeful of bra. And the skivvy shorts? Um, that would be a lot more revealing than a leotard as far as whatever happened to be underneath. Swimwear is an obvious no. But a lot of what men wear for competing would seriously show a lot of side skin or underwear if women wore the same clothing. And the tight clothes in sport in most case tend to compress and demphasize books, IMO, out of function. And if men wore the same stuff as women to compete in? Well, it would put much more emphasis on certain areas that are not emphasized when women wear the same clothing...for obvious reasons. Like anatomy.

[EmseB]

12 minutes ago, Bluegoat said:

If someone could tell me why men in volleyball, running, at the gym, skating, etc, don't wear crop tops, bun huggers, etc, in anything like the same numbers as women, I might be inclined to think there was something other than fashion reasons involved.  

But it's always the argument with the sexualisation of fashion that women just happen to like that sort of thing, because it's more comfortable, or empowering, or whatever. 

Individuals, persons, feeling a choice is utilitarian or just personal preference doesn't really tell us much about why there is a social difference of this type.  It's like saying that the only reason there are fewer women in politics is because they prefer not to go into politics.  Except there is even less reason in this case to find that plausible.

Men here run shirtless in marine skivvy shorts all the time. Or workout at the gym in scanty tank tops that show a lot of skin. Or tight t-shirts. I mean, I don't know, I don't exactly see men overly covering up to workout. I see about the same ratio wearing loose fitting clothes as do women. Maybe less clothing because it's acceptable for them to be shirtless and women can't do that for societal and functional reasons while working out. Ice skating outfits for men are pretty form fitting, IIRC correctly. Like speed skating? Or figure?

Also, women look prettier in skirts because they have different bodies than men. There, I've said it. 😄

I guess I'm wondering why a lot of what people wear for sports can't be attributed to athletics and not sex? And why no reasoning could possibly be more valid than sexualization of women in sport? I'm just saying that having grown up in a sport with revealing clothing for both sexes, I never got the sense that people were watching swim meets for the sex appeal, ya know?

[EmseB]

Sorry to spam the thread, but I was also thinking about military uniforms. When I was in, for dress blues, we could wear what the men wore with shirts tucked into dress pants, belts, low-quarter shoes. But we could, if we wanted, wear an untucked hemmed shirt with a flattering cut, a skirt, pumps, hose, etc.

So many women, including myself, chose the more feminine attire because it was more comfortable to wear an untucked shirt, to not have to worry about a belt getting out of alignment, not having to wear pants on a hot day, etc. I mean, the options were inherently more "feminine" and definitely were cut to a woman's figure, but it looked better, IMO, than trying to tuck in a button up shirt and deal with cleavage issues. So I think, yeah, there is something to different body types fitting in different clothes better, and working in different clothes better. But it's not necessarily sexual or misogynistic, unless all one is thinking about is, "Well, that shirt is clearly cut to a women's body." Well, yeah. Women have books. And hips. Things fit differently. We could have worn something more baggy, I guess, but I don't think it would have looked more professional, really.

[maize]

1 hour ago, EmseB said:

Also, women look prettier in skirts because they have different bodies than men. There, I've said it. 😄

 

Are you sure that women look better in skirts than men do? We've had a fair number of kilt threads over the years that would seem to challenge that assertion...

[Lady Marmalade]

1 hour ago, Bluegoat said:

 

I've not generally seen any men running around in just a jock-strap. 

If the issue was really having less clothes is universally better, I'd expect to see men wearing as small a shirt as possible, or no shirt.  Yet that's a fair bit less common, and in official sports outfits you generally only see it in swimming.  

 

Ha-ha! That is a true statement, thank goodness.

Men without a shirt is less common?  That's pretty much the official summer uniform around here for both athletes and non-athletes alike.   My DS prefers a shirt for exercise, again, because of the sweat factor.  Sweat needs a place to go and he prefers it not to run down his back and into his shorts.  

[moonflower]

Bluegoat, I don't disagree with you about the commercial nature of the sexualization of women's clothing (and makeup, and hair, and etc.)

But I don't think it's like a grand conspiracy of people at the top or companies who run certain industries to do this to women.  I think it's a natural outcome of the role of women in human groups as sexual objects (instead of sexual subjects, broadly speaking).  It doesn't necessarily trouble me that women are presented as having enhanced physical attributes, largely keyed in to emphasizing youth and potential reproductive success, because biologically and historically those are things that women trade on and are selected for. 

What bothers me is when these things are promoted in contexts where they are not appropriate, either because the age range is wrong (12 year old girls don't reproduce, and neither do 50 year old women) or because it is not a situation in which you want to encourage people interacting sexually (even subconsciously), like a mixed-gender workplace, or because the woman is no longer available, in a healthy and stable society, for pursuit (i.e. she's married).

Now that we have preteen girls wearing sexualized bathing suits and makeup, old women dyeing their hair and wearing tight skirts and heels, and married women in the workplace doing all of the above (except the bathing suits, I guess!), it is destabilizing and imo degenerate.

[Lady Marmalade]

1 hour ago, kdsuomi said:

 

Again, volleyball. Boys and men were loose long shorts and girls and women wear basically underwear. Are you all suggesting that the men are competing less athletically than the women because their movement is impeded? 

https://www.thisisinsider.com/why-do-women-beach-volleyball-players-wear-bikinis-olympics-2016-8

[moonflower]

Of course they want to; even if it were required, if they didn't want to wear them there'd be a resistance and they wouldn't wear them and the rule would change.  Since there's no rule, it's even clearer that they want to.

But the idea that women want to wear more sexualized clothing (and makeup, and hair dye, and shoes, and etc.) than men just out of the blue, out of fairyland, misunderstands how people develop inclinations about social behaviors in the first place.

That is not to say that there isn't some natural inclination toward this behavior, because the social pressure didn't come from fairyland either.  But the misapplication of that drive is problematic, not necessarily the drive itself, properly channeled.

[Frances]

17 minutes ago, Lady Marmalade said:

 

Ha-ha! That is a true statement, thank goodness.

Men without a shirt is less common?  That's pretty much the official summer uniform around here for both athletes and non-athletes alike.   My DS prefers a shirt for exercise, again, because of the sweat factor.  Sweat needs a place to go and he prefers it not to run down his back and into his shorts.  

Interesting. It’s so rare here that I almost always do a slight double take when I see it.

[mom2scouts]

https://www.bustle.com/articles/178180-why-do-female-gymnasts-dance-during-floor-routines-men-dont-the-olympics-rule-has-old-timey

 

[Frances]

On 2/14/2019 at 6:49 PM, moonflower said:

Of course they want to; even if it were required, if they didn't want to wear them there'd be a resistance and they wouldn't wear them and the rule would change.  Since there's no rule, it's even clearer that they want to.

But the idea that women want to wear more sexualized clothing (and makeup, and hair dye, and shoes, and etc.) than men just out of the blue, out of fairyland, misunderstands how people develop inclinations about social behaviors in the first place.

That is not to say that there isn't some natural inclination toward this behavior, because the social pressure didn't come from fairyland either.  But the misapplication of that drive is problematic, not necessarily the drive itself, properly channeled.

old. 😱

Edited March 3, 2019 by Frances

[frogger]

So I've learned a bit about sports here.

 

I don't have much to add, except for the fact that it really didn't make a pretty picture (actually had me somewhat laughing)  when someone's post had me envisioning a male in a female gymnast's leotard. 

 

Carry on.

Edited February 15, 2019 by frogger
Adding an appostrophe

[Catwoman]

3 hours ago, moonflower said:

Bluegoat, I don't disagree with you about the commercial nature of the sexualization of women's clothing (and makeup, and hair, and etc.)

But I don't think it's like a grand conspiracy of people at the top or companies who run certain industries to do this to women.  I think it's a natural outcome of the role of women in human groups as sexual objects (instead of sexual subjects, broadly speaking).  It doesn't necessarily trouble me that women are presented as having enhanced physical attributes, largely keyed in to emphasizing youth and potential reproductive success, because biologically and historically those are things that women trade on and are selected for. 

What bothers me is when these things are promoted in contexts where they are not appropriate, either because the age range is wrong (12 year old girls don't reproduce, and neither do 50 year old women) or because it is not a situation in which you want to encourage people interacting sexually (even subconsciously), like a mixed-gender workplace, or because the woman is no longer available, in a healthy and stable society, for pursuit (i.e. she's married).

Now that we have preteen girls wearing sexualized bathing suits and makeup, old women dyeing their hair and wearing tight skirts and heels, and married women in the workplace doing all of the above (except the bathing suits, I guess!), it is destabilizing and imo degenerate.

 

Are you saying that just because a woman is older, it’s “degenerate” for her to dye her hair and wear fitted skirts and high heels? And the same is true for married women in the workplace?

How are we supposed to dress?  Are we no longer allowed to be fashionable after a certain age, or after we get married? Should we never wear makeup?

I must be misunderstanding you, right?

 

[moonflower]

Well I would hesitate to directly blame any particular woman, and certainly any child, who engaged in this behavior because the social pressure is so strong and the morally problematic nature of it can be hard to see (I guess).  

I mean, when we say why do gymnasts wear these skimpy decorative leotards while men get to wear tank tops and looser shorts, we're not saying OMG what whores! - but we are saying maybe it is problematic that we as a society expect women and often girls to dress in a sexualized manner in a context where it might either not make sense or even be directly harmful.

I mean, I wear a bra.  I'm not trying to pretend my breasts are firm and youthful, exactly - I just feel very uncomfortable in public without a bra.  I also shave my legs (though not often) and underarms, not because I'm trying to suggest youth or entice men but because the social pressure in my segment of society is pretty strong to do these things and I'm just not comfortable with being that nonconformist.  I don't wear makeup, dye my hair, wear heels, or wear tight-fitting clothing, but I'm not in a job where it would be weird if I didn't (I work from home).

So while I judge the society-wide practice of sexualizing married women in the workforce, sexualizing prepubescent and young adolescent girls, and pressuring older women (not older men, you notice) to dye their hair and otherwise attempt to retain a youthful appearance, my judgment of individuals is somewhat more limited.

As far as fashion goes, it's not that I wish older women weren't pressured into or allowed to be fashionable - it's that I wish what were considered fashionable for older women (and young girls) weren't clothing and makeup that emphasizes or simulates sexual attributes in people who are not meant to be sex objects, biologically (that is, women past childbearing age and girls before childbearing age).  I wish it were as normal for older women to have gray hair as it is for older men.

[Catwoman]

1 hour ago, moonflower said:

Well I would hesitate to directly blame any particular woman, and certainly any child, who engaged in this behavior because the social pressure is so strong and the morally problematic nature of it can be hard to see (I guess).  

I mean, when we say why do gymnasts wear these skimpy decorative leotards while men get to wear tank tops and looser shorts, we're not saying OMG what whores! - but we are saying maybe it is problematic that we as a society expect women and often girls to dress in a sexualized manner in a context where it might either not make sense or even be directly harmful.

I mean, I wear a bra.  I'm not trying to pretend my breasts are firm and youthful, exactly - I just feel very uncomfortable in public without a bra.  I also shave my legs (though not often) and underarms, not because I'm trying to suggest youth or entice men but because the social pressure in my segment of society is pretty strong to do these things and I'm just not comfortable with being that nonconformist.  I don't wear makeup, dye my hair, wear heels, or wear tight-fitting clothing, but I'm not in a job where it would be weird if I didn't (I work from home).

So while I judge the society-wide practice of sexualizing married women in the workforce, sexualizing prepubescent and young adolescent girls, and pressuring older women (not older men, you notice) to dye their hair and otherwise attempt to retain a youthful appearance, my judgment of individuals is somewhat more limited.

As far as fashion goes, it's not that I wish older women weren't pressured into or allowed to be fashionable - it's that I wish what were considered fashionable for older women (and young girls) weren't clothing and makeup that emphasizes or simulates sexual attributes in people who are not meant to be sex objects, biologically (that is, women past childbearing age and girls before childbearing age).  I wish it were as normal for older women to have gray hair as it is for older men.

 

I’m not sure what you mean when you say that a woman is past her childbearing years is not meant to be a sex object. Older women still have sex. They still want to be desirable to their significant others. They still want to be sexy just because it makes them feel vibrant and attractive. They want to look in the mirror and like what they see. They still enjoy being noticed for their attractiveness, whether they want to be noticed by their spouse or by other people, or both. And they want those things for themselves, not because of societal pressure. Why would they reach a certain age and suddenly lose all interest in being desirable?

The older I get, the more I realize that age is just a number and that being older doesn’t necessarily mean that women feel older, or that they want to hide or suppress their sexuality. Why should they do that? Why is it inappropriate for a 50 year-old woman to dress in a way that makes people notice her and think she is attractive and sexy? 50 isn’t old! 

I’m sorry — I hope I’m not coming across in a snippy way. I don’t mean it that way, but I’m afraid I may be coming across poorly. 

 

[moonflower]

I'm saying that the biological function, on which the sane ordering of society is based, does not correlate; older women and younger girls are not biologically sex objects, because they cannot safely (or in some cases at all) reproduce as a class of people.  It doesn't make sense, as a society, to sexualize classes of women who cannot or should not reproduce; in some cases it sends a merely incorrect signal and in others a potential destabilizing or harmful one.  

I don't think it is inherently wrong for a 50 year old woman in this society to want to portray herself as sexually attractive, because the social norms demand in many cases that she do so.  It is hard to blame people individually for things that society is telling them are normal or required.  Most people just go with the flow; it's not good, exactly, but it's hard to condemn.

But I don't think it's healthy as a society to do this - to sexualize women in situations where it is destabilizing or to sexualize classes of women who are not actively looking for a reproductive partner.  I think it confuses the issue and cheapens/makes casual something that should be, I don't know, more sacred or more restricted.

 

The idea that women want to wear makeup for themselves, not because of societal pressure, misunderstands what societal pressure is.  Of course they want to do it for themselves; no one is marching into their homes and demanding they put on lipstick in the morning.  But why do they want to do these things?  Why does a woman feel inclined to simulate sexual arousal in the way she paints her face and a man does not (generally speaking)?  Is it just a random coincidence that the majority of women dye their hair and the majority of men do not, that the majority of women wear tighter fitting clothing than men, that the majority of women wear makeup while men do not, that they wear shoes that change their posture, etc.?  If it's not a coincidence, what is the cause?

I'd say the cause is biological (women have a natural inclination to promote themselves at certain times as sexual objects in order to acquire a reproductive partner) and cultural.  What drives the culture is in part biology (culture doesn't come from nowhere either, of course) but that it can go awry - sometimes a culture becomes dysfunctional in one way or another, and imo ours is dysfunctional in this way.

 

[moonflower]

It also, imo, devalues older women for what they are.  If you can't look old - that is to say, if there is social pressure to dye your hair and wear younger women's clothing styles and reduce wrinkles and cover age spots and etc. - then the message within society is that oldness is not beautiful *ETA in women.  Middle age is not beautiful in women.  Not just oldness and middle age aren't sexually valuable/attractive (that is biologically unarguable and obvious), but they are not in and of themselves beautiful and valuable in women.  Instead, you must pretend to be younger because that is what we value.

It feels to me like saying that if hypothetically 70% of black women bleached their skin and wore caucasian hair wigs, we shouldn't question the trend on a societal level because after all they're just doing it because they like it, they want to feel pretty, bleaching their skin makes them feel more attractive, why is this a problem. 

On a societal level, I'd ask what that trend is saying about how society views what is beautiful and by implication valuable.

Edited February 15, 2019 by moonflower

[Bluegoat]

11 hours ago, EmseB said:

Men here run shirtless in marine skivvy shorts all the time. Or workout at the gym in scanty tank tops that show a lot of skin. Or tight t-shirts. I mean, I don't know, I don't exactly see men overly covering up to workout. I see about the same ratio wearing loose fitting clothes as do women. Maybe less clothing because it's acceptable for them to be shirtless and women can't do that for societal and functional reasons while working out. Ice skating outfits for men are pretty form fitting, IIRC correctly. Like speed skating? Or figure?

Also, women look prettier in skirts because they have different bodies than men. There, I've said it. 😄

I guess I'm wondering why a lot of what people wear for sports can't be attributed to athletics and not sex? And why no reasoning could possibly be more valid than sexualization of women in sport? I'm just saying that having grown up in a sport with revealing clothing for both sexes, I never got the sense that people were watching swim meets for the sex appeal, ya know?

 

I think you are focusing too much on individual examples. That really only tells us about individuals. (Similarly, that it is possible to find non-skanky formal clothing doesn't tell us much about the overall direction of the fashion industry.) THat you occasionally see men in the marines run shirtless isn't really saying a lot about what the overall trend is. (I am surprised, as it happens, in the Canadian military you'd not see people running shirtless.)

There are plenty of sports where women and men wear the same things, more or less.  Almost all of the winter ones, wrestling, and I would say things like swimming even though there are certain differences, or in the typical differences between men and women's gymnastics.  These are all cases where form follows function to a large degree.  I personally don't think that even some aesthetic differences in style are sexualization, either.

I'd also say that elite sports have somewhat improved in this in very recent years as they have realised that their appeal is going to be limited in cultures where people cover themselves more, and some have made something of a reversal - beach volleyball is a good example which was widely ridiculed when it first became an Olympic sport, and was seen as being chosen mainly to appeal to tv networks and bring in cash.

OTOH, there has been a strong push in the fashion industry in general to sexualise women's clothing more and more, for 30 years or so.  You can see that reflected, along the same timeline, in the sporting attire people are wearing, particularly at places like gyms, running, and there are certain other physical activities.  The worst by far that I can think of is actually competitive dance, but it's also seen to some extent in some other sports.  The outfits for women have become more bare, while those for men have not.  In some like skating or sometimes gymnastics, it's fairly common to see routines where some of the dance or style elements are intended to have a sexy vibe - if it is a woman or pair - not so much for men alone. (And if you try and imagine men wearing the same kind of thing or doing the same kind of moves, even equivalent ones, it seems very weird.)

I don't know why anyone would think this was anything other than a reflection of the general social trend.

As far as people not sexualising female athletes - that it happens a lot has been a major complaint of female athletes for years.  Very often connected with revenue production.  And yes, I think plenty of women go to the gym thinking about what they look like, and work-out clothes are marketed to take advantage of that.  Just like other types of women's clothing.  

 

[Bluegoat]

10 hours ago, moonflower said:

Bluegoat, I don't disagree with you about the commercial nature of the sexualization of women's clothing (and makeup, and hair, and etc.)

But I don't think it's like a grand conspiracy of people at the top or companies who run certain industries to do this to women.  I think it's a natural outcome of the role of women in human groups as sexual objects (instead of sexual subjects, broadly speaking).  It doesn't necessarily trouble me that women are presented as having enhanced physical attributes, largely keyed in to emphasizing youth and potential reproductive success, because biologically and historically those are things that women trade on and are selected for. 

What bothers me is when these things are promoted in contexts where they are not appropriate, either because the age range is wrong (12 year old girls don't reproduce, and neither do 50 year old women) or because it is not a situation in which you want to encourage people interacting sexually (even subconsciously), like a mixed-gender workplace, or because the woman is no longer available, in a healthy and stable society, for pursuit (i.e. she's married).

Now that we have preteen girls wearing sexualized bathing suits and makeup, old women dyeing their hair and wearing tight skirts and heels, and married women in the workplace doing all of the above (except the bathing suits, I guess!), it is destabilizing and imo degenerate.

 

No, I don't think it's a conspiracy either, it's part of a larger social phenomena.

The exception I might make to that, though I'd not call it a conspiracy, is with pulling in money in media like television or advertising.  There are often explicit attempts to boost viewing by having scantily clad, attractive women. I do think this is something that impacts sports when they become part of the entertainment industry - there can be explicit decisions made to appeal to viewers on that level.

 

[Bluegoat]

7 hours ago, Catwoman said:

 

Are you saying that just because a woman is older, it’s “degenerate” for her to dye her hair and wear fitted skirts and high heels? And the same is true for married women in the workplace?

How are we supposed to dress?  Are we no longer allowed to be fashionable after a certain age, or after we get married? Should we never wear makeup?

I must be misunderstanding you, right?

 

 

At a society level, you can ask whet these things are really about.  Why do women in particular, though men to some extent as well, feel so much pressure to look younger, and more like they are in their sexual prime?

That isn't something that is a cultural inevitability.  Some cultures have a lot more respect for elders, for example, and there is less sense that women need to somehow artificially continue to look younger. Being older gets you respect, maybe even power.

I don't think it makes for a particularly healthy society when we are so focused on youth, on youth culture.  It's interesting at times to see the way the ideas of youth are compared to the views of older people in areas like politics, for example, there really is a popular trope that young people's ideas are more likely to be progressive and therefore good, while the older people are stuck in the past.  That's quite a different view than older people having the wisdom of experience and taking the long view, which the young should learn from.

It's interesting too to see where this has led.  On the one hand, women choosing to look attractive has now brought us to a place where it is common in many places for women to have cosmetic procedures so they can feel beautiful, their authentic selves.  And presumably these women feel, just like those who shave their armpits or dye their hair, that they realy want and need that botox or face lift or whatever, right?  But if we step back, what does that represent about our comfort with our bodies and our ageing and our place in society?  If we feel discomfort with those things, is it really society that is right?  Should women be risking their health to feel normal for their age? Is the fact that seeing women with natural hair after 40 is so rare that women who don't colour feel dowdy a good thing?  

[Joker]

As far as what women are most comfortable exercising in, I just have to look at what I choose when in the comfort of my own home every day. I choose the skimpy, tight workout clothes because they allow the most movement and are the most comfortable. It has zero to do with outside influence or how I look. When the weather is nicer and dh and I take long walks outside, I always opt for more modest and loose clothes but I am not as comfortable. I wish I felt okay to wear the same clothes outside but I don't. Also, I don't know about all of you but when I'm really exercising or playing an active sport I hate loose fitting clothes because things now aren't staying where they should. I need tight bottoms as well as tops. I get you can just cover up the tight clothes with loose, modest clothes but that's to appease those here who don't like the skimpy look. I don't like all the loose clothes getting in the way. 

Also, I love gymnastics but I don't spend time paying attention to what's hanging out I guess because I really don't notice it. I'm always in awe of the power these women have and what they're able to do. Sometimes I enjoy the dancing and sometimes I don't. 

[Farrar]

This conversation depresses me. Young girls just trying to do their sport are too sexual. Woman postmenopause should stop trying to be mutton dressed up as lamb. 

Good grief, just wear what you want. And gymnasts who need to move... honestly, I've seen some young girls doing dance that I would deem as suggestive, but I've literally never seen a professional gymnastics routine that I would. They don't have to wear tights if they don't want to wear tights. It's not about being suggestive, it's just about the sport.

[Jean in Newcastle]

Sex is not just about reproduction. 

Showing the female form is not in itself sexual. Neither is showing the make form  (I am not advocating nudity.)

Being attractive (however you and your culture want to interpret and show that) is not an invitation for people to sexualize you. 

Not understanding that sexual thoughts and activity starts in the mind is what sets up rape culture. It is also what sets up a legalistic misogynistic culture that can still lead to the sexualizing of someone scandalously exposing an ankle. Yes - I know that I am taking it beyond what some of you want but    this whole idea of the “morality police “  weighing in on clothing that in no way gives anyone the right to think of another person as an object- let alone a sexual one- honestly makes me want to scream. This is the kind of thinking that says that Dr, Nassar must have been tempted by those gymasts in those skimpy outfits because they didn’t have the decency to wear shorts. 

[Guest]

I was thinking about this while DD’s senior (u18) all girl team practiced last night. Most of the girls wear t-shirts and jogging style shorts, a few wear leggings. And I can tell you that Inhave seen almost every girl’s underwear at some point tonight, because when you’re tumbling and stunting, loose clothes move. Even the cheer uniforms that are essentially a sports bra and compression shorts don’t-and usually have pretty substantial support, so while they cover less overall, at least they cover reliably. It doesn’t mean that I don’t prefer the uniforms that have a bit more fabric, but the tightness, at least, is not accidental and serves a purpose. 

 

And, to lighten the mood, Paul Hunt doing women’s beam 

 

Edited February 15, 2019 by dmmetler

[umsami]

Not really relevant to gymnastics...but it is to outdoor sports like beach volleyball.  As somebody who lives in Florida where it is often quite hot, you will notice that the people who work outside all day often wear long sleeve shirts (often a long t-shirt hoodie), long pants, big hats, etc.  Why?  It can actually keep one cooler and also helps protect against sun damage.  That's also why in many desert countries, the traditional dress for men and women is often basically a long sleeve loose dress (thobe, galabaya) with some sort of head covering.  Because it's the coolest clothing to wear in such a climate.   While I can understand why loose clothing might be an impediment to certain sports, actual long sleeves, when outside, should help keep the participants cooler.  I will say that in America (and it does seem to be an American phenomenon/belief), people believe that fewer clothes equals cooler.  Not true.

 

http://blog.coolibar.com/the-secret-advantage-of-long-sleeves/

"A number of years ago, an inquisitive research team led by C Richard Taylor and Virginia Finch of Harvard University and Amiram Shkolnik and Arieh Borut of Tel Aviv University were puzzled by the ability of the Bedouins of the Sinai to minimize solar heat loads in a hot desert. The study, aptly called Why Do Bedouins Wear Black Robes in Hot Deserts?, measured the people’s overall heat gain and loss in the robes, considering their amount of coverage, long sleeves and the color of their robes.

A volunteer wearing different levels of coverage and different colored clothing was faced into the midday sun in the desert for 30 minutes. Withstanding 95F, the volunteer placed in the Negev desert at the bottom of the rift valley between the Dead Sea and the Gulf of Eilat wore either: 1) a black Bedouin robe; 2) a similar robe that was white; 3) a tan army uniform; or 4) shorts (that is, he was semi‑nude).

The results were surprising, but not surprising. Long sleeves and more clothing kept the wearer cooler. As the report puts it: “The amount of heat gained by a Bedouin exposed to the hot desert is the same whether he wears a black or a white robe. The additional heat absorbed by the black robe was lost before it reached the skin.”"

Edited February 15, 2019 by umsami

[JumpyTheFrog]

Over the last six years of being at my son's practice at three different gyms, I have noticed that nearly all the girls age 11-12+ choose to practice wearing boy-cut shorts over their leotards. A large percent of younger girls do as well. This suggests that these girls prefer to have their butts more covered than the required uniforms allow. (Remember, girls don't wear underwear with their leotards.) Also, the national group in charge of college club gymnastics (not NCAA) recently voted to allow the women to wear shorts over their leotard while competing. This means it was banned before. Women and girls were/are prevented from covering up a little more, even though they have to deal with menstruation issues.

The shorts boys wear are on the shorter side. They are constantly tugging on them. They pretty much all wish they were longer, and this is despite them having probably six more inches of their legs covered than the girls are allowed.

ETA: The boys wear the shorts only for floor and vault. For the other four events they wear pommel pants (pants with stirrups).

Edited February 15, 2019 by JumpyTheFrog

[maize]

39 minutes ago, umsami said:

Not really relevant to gymnastics...but it is to outdoor sports like beach volleyball.  As somebody who lives in Florida where it is often quite hot, you will notice that the people who work outside all day often wear long sleeve shirts (often a long t-shirt hoodie), long pants, big hats, etc.  Why?  It can actually keep one cooler and also helps protect against sun damage.  That's also why in many desert countries, the traditional dress for men and women is often basically a long sleeve loose dress (thobe, galabaya) with some sort of head covering.  Because it's the coolest clothing to wear in such a climate.   While I can understand why loose clothing might be an impediment to certain sports, actual long sleeves, when outside, should help keep the participants cooler.  I will say that in America (and it does seem to be an American phenomenon/belief), people believe that fewer clothes equals cooler.  Not true.

 

http://blog.coolibar.com/the-secret-advantage-of-long-sleeves/

"A number of years ago, an inquisitive research team led by C Richard Taylor and Virginia Finch of Harvard University and Amiram Shkolnik and Arieh Borut of Tel Aviv University were puzzled by the ability of the Bedouins of the Sinai to minimize solar heat loads in a hot desert. The study, aptly called Why Do Bedouins Wear Black Robes in Hot Deserts?, measured the people’s overall heat gain and loss in the robes, considering their amount of coverage, long sleeves and the color of their robes.

A volunteer wearing different levels of coverage and different colored clothing was faced into the midday sun in the desert for 30 minutes. Withstanding 95F, the volunteer placed in the Negev desert at the bottom of the rift valley between the Dead Sea and the Gulf of Eilat wore either: 1) a black Bedouin robe; 2) a similar robe that was white; 3) a tan army uniform; or 4) shorts (that is, he was semi‑nude).

The results were surprising, but not surprising. Long sleeves and more clothing kept the wearer cooler. As the report puts it: “The amount of heat gained by a Bedouin exposed to the hot desert is the same whether he wears a black or a white robe. The additional heat absorbed by the black robe was lost before it reached the skin.”"

Yes, when I worked on an archeology dig in Jordan we mimicked the coverage of the Beduoins we lived with--loose fitting, light colored clothing, brimmed hats to shade our faces. Really only our hands were uncovered.

Also, we started work early in the morning and stayed indoors after noon.

[JumpyTheFrog]

I have to say, I'm surprised by the number of people saying that skimpier clothes are pretty much always/automatically more comfortable for various sports. I find it hard to believe that such short shorts are needed for indoor volleyball. Men seem to compete just fine in many sports (not swimming) despite being covered.

While I am not suggesting banning certain outfits, I do strongly dislike the number of sports than require girls/women to dress in a skimpier fashion than they feel comfortable (when safety isn't an actual issue). Can you imagine how many fewer women would run 5Ks if they were required to wear short running shorts and a sports bra and regular t-shirts weren't allowed? My high school had a pool, but I avoided signing up for swimming in gym class because I didn't want to be in a bathing suit in front of so many people (even though at the time I wasn't overweight).

It seems disingenuous to me to claim that women just happen to like wearing so much less and/or tighter clothing than men during sports, or at any time really, as if advertising and culture have zero to do with any of it. Men may care about their appearance, but advertising isn't trying to convince them they need to wear booty shorts to look good. 

[Bluegoat]

1 hour ago, Jean in Newcastle said:

Sex is not just about reproduction. 

Showing the female form is not in itself sexual. Neither is showing the make form  (I am not advocating nudity.)

Being attractive (however you and your culture want to interpret and show that) is not an invitation for people to sexualize you. 

Not understanding that sexual thoughts and activity starts in the mind is what sets up rape culture. It is also what sets up a legalistic misogynistic culture that can still lead to the sexualizing of someone scandalously exposing an ankle. Yes - I know that I am taking it beyond what some of you want but    this whole idea of the “morality police “  weighing in on clothing that in no way gives anyone the right to think of another person as an object- let alone a sexual one- honestly makes me want to scream. This is the kind of thinking that says that Dr, Nassar must have been tempted by those gymasts in those skimpy outfits because they didn’t have the decency to wear shorts. 

 

So - why do you think it is that being sexual and attractive, for women, means trying to look younger?  And why is it that the clothing we think of as appropriate and normal for men to look attractive is so much less likely to make a display of their body than women's clothing?  Look at a red carpet event like the Oscars - it's pretty rare to see male flesh besides the hands and face, and yet the women are typically showing arms, cleavage, backs, sometimes legs and the belly or sides of the body - not to mention the men will be in flat shoes and the women generally on heels.  None of that is considered abnormal or odd.

I mean, sure, we can just accept what society tells us is attractive and go along with that - goodness knows we are likely all influenced by that in what we find pleasing to the eye.

But how is that different than just accepting any other sex roles that society tells us are normal?  Should we not be stepping back and saying, is this difference one we want to have as normative?  What does it imply about men and women?  Does it tend to force us into certain roles or ways of thinking?  

I think its pretty significant that as women age they feel physically less desirable and valuble, that they are pressured to maintain an appearance of youth, often at a significant cost of time and money.  

[EmseB]

3 hours ago, Bluegoat said:

 

I think you are focusing too much on individual examples. That really only tells us about individuals. (Similarly, that it is possible to find non-skanky formal clothing doesn't tell us much about the overall direction of the fashion industry.) THat you occasionally see men in the marines run shirtless isn't really saying a lot about what the overall trend is. (I am surprised, as it happens, in the Canadian military you'd not see people running shirtless.)

There are plenty of sports where women and men wear the same things, more or less.  Almost all of the winter ones, wrestling, and I would say things like swimming even though there are certain differences, or in the typical differences between men and women's gymnastics.  These are all cases where form follows function to a large degree.  I personally don't think that even some aesthetic differences in style are sexualization, either.

I'd also say that elite sports have somewhat improved in this in very recent years as they have realised that their appeal is going to be limited in cultures where people cover themselves more, and some have made something of a reversal - beach volleyball is a good example which was widely ridiculed when it first became an Olympic sport, and was seen as being chosen mainly to appeal to tv networks and bring in cash.

OTOH, there has been a strong push in the fashion industry in general to sexualise women's clothing more and more, for 30 years or so.  You can see that reflected, along the same timeline, in the sporting attire people are wearing, particularly at places like gyms, running, and there are certain other physical activities.  The worst by far that I can think of is actually competitive dance, but it's also seen to some extent in some other sports.  The outfits for women have become more bare, while those for men have not.  In some like skating or sometimes gymnastics, it's fairly common to see routines where some of the dance or style elements are intended to have a sexy vibe - if it is a woman or pair - not so much for men alone. (And if you try and imagine men wearing the same kind of thing or doing the same kind of moves, even equivalent ones, it seems very weird.)

I don't know why anyone would think this was anything other than a reflection of the general social trend.

As far as people not sexualising female athletes - that it happens a lot has been a major complaint of female athletes for years.  Very often connected with revenue production.  And yes, I think plenty of women go to the gym thinking about what they look like, and work-out clothes are marketed to take advantage of that.  Just like other types of women's clothing.  

 

Sorry, I was trying to say that, in general around my area, I see men working out in clothing like marine-style skivvy shorts (short-shorts, runners shorts) and not wearing shirts or wearing tank tops, etc. I wasn't speaking of marines or the military specifically (although I guess that demographic is higher around where I live, but I have no way of knowing who's who). IOW, my experience has not been that men in general are really covering up for working out and women aren't. What I see at the gym and elsewhere is that fit people of both sexes wear less clothing than people who are less fit.  Fit people also spend more time admiring themselves (and watching the muscle groups they are using, I guess) while exercising than non-fit people.

On the idea of elite sports, I really think more time is spent on function of clothing that looks. Elite athletes won't wear stuff that does not allow them to compete well. Of course looks are a consideration and no one wants to look bleh while competing at an elite level.

As for the clothing industry more generally, it's not just that I can find "non-skanky" formal wear, or regular clothing, it's that I see it marketed all over the place pretty regularly. Again, Old Navy, Gap, Banana Republic, JCrew, Target clothing, Land's End, etc., etc...none of those are going for sexy near as I can tell. I mean, they are going for attractive, but that's fashion and clothing in general. Of course you can go totally the other way and get sexy-looking stuff, but that seems like...of course you can! I grant that there is a lot of fashion trends that are focused on women's sexiness, and competitive dance for little girls is an egregious example of the extension of that, but I also see dance studios in our town (my daughter belongs to one) that promote conservative styles of dance and costuming as a selling point and alternative to the other stuff. 

It's not that I don't know about the idea of using women and sex to sell stuff. Of course this happens. I actually think it's been happening a lot longer than 30 years. I just don't think it is the primary motivator, or as influential in most sport uniforms, or even regular everyday clothing that people are actually wearing. Then again, I think advertising and influencer culture has it's limits demographically and often times what is marketed to teens or young people who are going out a lot and dating, etc., has limited influence on people not in that stage of life.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I am all for women and men athletes being able to choose clothing that allows them to compete or practice in comfort as well as in a way that allows them to be the best at that sport. 

I am all for people on a team sport having a say in what their uniforms look like.  (Though I understand that competition uniforms are going to be different than what is worn in practice  )

I think that women should be governing the associations for women’s sports. 

As far as fashion in general- people can wear what they want. If someone wants to wear tweed and sensible shoes then they should do so. (That’s actually more my style.). 

[JumpyTheFrog]

31 minutes ago, EmseB said:

Then again, I think advertising and influencer culture has it's limits demographically and often times what is marketed to teens or young people who are going out a lot and dating, etc., has limited influence on people not in that stage of life.

 

I constantly seem women 30-55 wearing what is aimed at teenagers. I get the impression that before teenage culture emerged last century, kids used to wear scaled-down versions of what their parents wore (after toddlerhood, anyway). Now I think it is largely the reverse. Fashions are aimed at the young and their moms and middle-aged women follow along.

[Lady Marmalade]

13 minutes ago, JumpyTheFrog said:

 

I constantly seem women 30-55 wearing what is aimed at teenagers. I get the impression that before teenage culture emerged last century, kids used to wear scaled-down versions of what their parents wore (after toddlerhood, anyway). Now I think it is largely the reverse. Fashions are aimed at the young and their moms and middle-aged women follow along.

So wait, because I'm 41 years old and not a teenager I should not be wearing my favorite Aeropostale jeggings because they came from a store that mostly markets to teenagers?  Wow. 

As long as I am comfortable, there's nothing wrong with being trendy simply because it doesn't "suit my age".  I am certainly not going to be a polyester pants wearing granny with a floral print button up.  My own grandmother would frequently go through her closet and hand me her discards as hand-me-downs when I was a teenager.  She had AMAZING taste and was always on trend, and she would have slapped anyone who told her she wasn't dressing her age. 

[hshibley]

23 minutes ago, JumpyTheFrog said:

 

I constantly seem women 30-55 wearing what is aimed at teenagers. I get the impression that before teenage culture emerged last century, kids used to wear scaled-down versions of what their parents wore (after toddlerhood, anyway). Now I think it is largely the reverse. Fashions are aimed at the young and their moms and middle-aged women follow along.

Maybe it’s regional. I don’t see adult women wearing inappropriate clothing all over the place. I’m 50 I ran this morning at 5am wearing capris leggings and a t shirt. When I go to the gym to lift I wear leggings and a fitted tec tank. It’s comfortable and keeps me covered. All the women in my class wear variations of the same. The guys wear shorts and tanks or t’s. The women’s clothing is definitely more modest while doing push-ups and chest presses. To be honest at my gym the men and women are too busy getting their work  out in at 6 am to worry about what everyone else is wearing. 

Now I’m wearing capris jeans a woven tank and a sweater. I like what I’m wearing and dress for myself not others. 

[unsinkable]

32 minutes ago, Lady Marmalade said:

So wait, because I'm 41 years old and not a teenager I should not be wearing my favorite Aeropostale jeggings because they came from a store that mostly markets to teenagers?  Wow. 

As long as I am comfortable, there's nothing wrong with being trendy simply because it doesn't "suit my age".  I am certainly not going to be a polyester pants wearing granny with a floral print button up.  My own grandmother would frequently go through her closet and hand me her discards as hand-me-downs when I was a teenager.  She had AMAZING taste and was always on trend, and she would have slapped anyone who told her she wasn't dressing her age. 

Aren't you making the point for the people who are essentially saying the fashion industry has a heavy influence in what women wear? You only took your granny's clothes bc she was always "on trend."

[JumpyTheFrog]

1 hour ago, Lady Marmalade said:

So wait, because I'm 41 years old and not a teenager I should not be wearing my favorite Aeropostale jeggings because they came from a store that mostly markets to teenagers?  Wow. 

 

No, that isn't what I said or meant. My point is that as far as I know (and I may be wrong about this), fashion used to be aimed at adult women and the kids followed along. Whether I am right or wrong about that, fashion today is definitely aimed at young women, but older women generally end up adopting the same styles. Pointing this out does not equal me wagging my finger and saying, "Dress your age!"

[JumpyTheFrog]

1 hour ago, unsinkable said:

Aren't you making the point for the people who are essentially saying the fashion industry has a heavy influence in what women wear? You only took your granny's clothes bc she was always "on trend."

 

Thanks for pointing this out. What I was trying to say, but didn't explain very well, was that the fashion/hair/makeup industries make a ton of money from getting young women to change how they look all the time. Older women are left with either being considered out-of-style or frumpy if they want to continue wearing some style that flatters their body more but is no longer in. For example, boot cut jeans are probably flatter the biggest percent of women out there. They generally look decent whether a woman is skinny or overweight. Unfortunately, the fashion industry has spent the last decade trying to get rid of them to replace them with skinny jeans. In my opinion, skinny jeans make thin women look skeletal and overweight women look even larger. In other words, stores have largely reduced the supply of flattering jeans and replaced them with ones that seem like they were designed to make women look worse. Now that enough people have made the switch, the fashion industry is trying to bring back the high-waisted 80s mom jeans that some, uh, out-of-style women probably just got rid of.

I'm even starting to see...wait for it...jumpers. All you 1980s and 1990s homeschooling moms, reach into your closets. In another few years you may be considered "cool."

[Lady Marmalade]

1 hour ago, unsinkable said:

Aren't you making the point for the people who are essentially saying the fashion industry has a heavy influence in what women wear? You only took your granny's clothes bc she was always "on trend."

Actually I was making the point that "old people" shouldn't be required to dress like "old people".   The comment I was commenting on seemed to say that people should dress their age otherwise it's considered inappropriate. My point was that most teenagers wouldn't even think about wearing cast-offs from a grandparent, but at the time I thought it was super cool that my grandma was shopping at the same kind of stores I did- and she looked great and pulled together, NOT like an elderly lady trying to dress like a teenager.  

[rebcoola]

Idk about all the other stuff but we have a few girls at our gym who compete wearing shorts I believe for religious reasons. The down side is that their are deductions for tugging or adjusting the uniform during competition so they are stuck with wedgies or whatever.  This is true for hair, strapes, braces etc so that is why less is more.  Yes they could wear biketards but they seem to be universally  hated from a comfort standpoint.  

Edited February 15, 2019 by rebcoola

[Farrar]

There's a line somewhere between discussing the ways in which the fashion industry, youth obsession, misogyny, etc. affect how we want to dress in the first place... and turning that into an excuse to slam the way everyone dresses and slut shame both girls in sport and woman who can't have children. It's so paternalistic to act like people can't possibly be doing what they want, they must just be manipulated by the forces you don't like.

[hshibley]

18 minutes ago, JumpyTheFrog said:

 

Thanks for pointing this out. What I was trying to say, but didn't explain very well, was that the fashion/hair/makeup industries make a ton of money from getting young women to change how they look all the time. Older women are left with either being considered out-of-style or frumpy if they want to continue wearing some style that flatters their body more but is no longer in. For example, boot cut jeans are probably flatter the biggest percent of women out there. They generally look decent whether a woman is skinny or overweight. Unfortunately, the fashion industry has spent the last decade trying to get rid of them to replace them with skinny jeans. In my opinion, skinny jeans make thin women look skeletal and overweight women look even larger. In other words, stores have largely reduced the supply of flattering jeans and replaced them with ones that seem like they were designed to make women look worse. Now that enough people have made the switch, the fashion industry is trying to bring back the high-waisted 80s mom jeans that some, uh, out-of-style women probably just got rid of.

I'm even starting to see...wait for it...jumpers. All you 1980s and 1990s homeschooling moms, reach into your closets. In another few years you may be considered "cool."

A quick search shows you can buy boot cut jeans from a variety of sources Talbots and Ann Taylor which definitely cater to a more mature customer as well as lucky jeans. I don’t like bootcut jeans and I don’t see many people wearing them. Maybe that’s due to the fact that others don’t as well. Women should be able to dress how they want regardless of age without other women pushing their own preferences on them.  Women who dress differently that you (this is the generic you) are not by default trying to look younger or sexually attractive etc. maybe they just like what they are wearing. 

Women/girls who are athletic or are trying to maintain their physical health should not be shamed for wearing clothes that they are comfortable in while training. We as women should be supporting them. 

[Jean in Newcastle]

We have so many choices with regards to clothing and fashion. I don’t see what is wrong with letting women decide what they want to wear. It’s ok to dress in a way that makes you feel pretty. It’s ok to have clothes that flatter all sorts of body types- even curvier ones. Clothes are not inherently “younger “ or “older “ - that too is a cultural construct- fortunately one that is going away to some degree. 

[Catwoman]

27 minutes ago, hshibley said:

A quick search shows you can buy boot cut jeans from a variety of sources Talbots and Ann Taylor which definitely cater to a more mature customer as well as lucky jeans. I don’t like bootcut jeans and I don’t see many people wearing them. Maybe that’s due to the fact that others don’t as well. Women should be able to dress how they want regardless of age without other women pushing their own preferences on them.  Women who dress differently that you (this is the generic you) are not by default trying to look younger or sexually attractive etc. maybe they just like what they are wearing. 

Women/girls who are athletic or are trying to maintain their physical health should not be shamed for wearing clothes that they are comfortable in while training. We as women should be supporting them. 

 

24 minutes ago, Jean in Newcastle said:

We have so many choices with regards to clothing and fashion. I don’t see what is wrong with letting women decide what they want to wear. It’s ok to dress in a way that makes you feel pretty. It’s ok to have clothes that flatter all sorts of body types- even curvier ones. Clothes are not inherently “younger “ or “older “ - that too is a cultural construct- fortunately one that is going away to some degree. 

 

I agree!

And seriously, what’s wrong with wanting to feel attractive? What’s wrong with wanting to look your best? It seems ridiculous that after a certain age, it’s time to pack it in and give up. I don’t buy into the argument that women only want to look good because they are giving in to societal pressure. That concept is so insulting to women, like we aren’t strong enough or smart enough to do anything but do whatever fashion magazines tell us to do... unless we’re over 50, in which case we have no business even looking at a fashion magazine because we are no longer entitled to want to look attractive. 

And what about single or divorced older women? Are they not allowed to want to attract romantic partners once they are beyond their childbearing years? I don’t understand the feeling that older women are no longer sexual. I feel like the only people who believe that must be so young that their parents are in their 50s, and they don’t want to imagine the idea that their parents ever have sex.

I know one of the signs of depression is when a woman stops caring about her appearance, so maybe some of those women who can’t be bothered with trying to look attractive aren’t actually so enlightened... maybe they are just depressed and have given up.

Don't get me wrong — if a woman is unconcerned with her appearance and is happy dressing way out of date, and she is fine with not styling her hair and never wearing makeup or nice shoes or any number of other things, that’s perfectly fine. It’s her choice. But that same woman is not entitled to feel smug and judgmental and morally superior to the women who do care about their appearances and who take steps to look their best, because that’s not helpful or supportive; it’s just mean.

Edited February 15, 2019 by Catwoman
I can’t type today.