Poirot: ‘I think most women are happy competing in a minimum of clothing.’

Really?

Is that why Australia’s Opals have successfully lobbied since the Beijing Olympics for a change of uniforms from the skimpy, figure-hugging body suit to the looser, body-covering uniforms worn by the men?

And is that behind Anna Meares’ crack to Sally Pearson in a televised interview during the London Olympics about competing ‘in your underwear’?

And I suppose that completely contradicts the 2006 Senate Committee report that revealed many young women drop out of competitive sports because of the skimpy uniforms they are mandated to wear at local and elite level.

And I suppose it’s why sports competition dress code rules have to spell out in minute detail the mandatory differences in male and female attire for each sport. For example, in the case of beach volleyball (Olympics dress codes, Section 24.2, 1984) ‘the bottom of men’s shorts must … finish a minimum of 15 cm above the knee’ and women’s briefs must be ‘cut on an upward angle towards the top of the leg’.

I think it's more a case of women being 'happy' not to be kicked off the squad for refusing to comply with mandatory dress codes. Until the overt and covert pressures are removed from women athletes to compete in skimpy attire, e.g. because of discriminatory dress codes, double-standard sponsorships, media perve factors, fear of ‘wowser’ labelling etc, we have no real way of knowing how many of them would actually prefer to cover up a bit more.

Killarney,

I'll have to own up to being rather ignorant of the various sporting dress-codes for women (and men). Thanks for the info. It would be interesting to know how the "skimpy" rules came about in the first place.

'I think it's more a case of women being 'happy' not to be kicked off the squad for refusing to comply with mandatory dress codes. '

I think it's more a case of women wanting more funding and better sponsorship deals. It all goes back to my argument, that to even break even, women must show flesh. Why? Because women don't support their sports. As men don't get floor space in Westfields because they don't support fashion.

'Until the overt and covert pressures are removed from women athletes to compete in skimpy attire, e.g. because of discriminatory dress codes, double-standard sponsorships, media perve factors, fear of ‘wowser’ labelling etc,'

Oh the pressure of million dollar sponsorship deals! The horror!

Until women start paying for bums on seats, ie these days bums on couches, watching sport on TV, their sport stars and the organisers of womens events will have to attempt to fund the sport via men's attraction to women.

If it rated on the Tele, there would be advertising revenue, and women would have the power to set their own dress codes. But the girlz let them down, being as they are more interested in reality TV and soaps.

In this media age, brave men of the world, the cricket traditionalists have refused the commercialisation of their whites, with the small sacrifice of the odd badge here or there.

See, its up to the individual how much they will sacrifice their values for money. While Venus Williams intimidates and pushes the boundaries away from traditional tennis clothes to sell her fashion wares, the cricketers have attempted to keep advertisers at bay. Think of the derogatory 'pyjama cricket' phrase.

Women would do well to support the noble cricketers, standing up for their principles, sacrificing sponsorship dollars to keep their whites, in this short attention span corporate world, in the only true test of skill and endurance, over 5 days!

How many brave women have the guts to compete over 5 days, getting their whites all grass-stained.

I'm annoyed at not thinking of a way to make this post an entertaining read. But…

I've just been going through the Official Beach Volleyball Rules 2009-2012 of The Federation Internationale de Volleyball…

http://www.fivb.org/EN/BeachVolleyball/Rules/bvrb0912_forweb_EN.pdf

Section 5.1.1 says "A player's equipment consists of shorts or a bathing suit. A jersey or "tank top" is optional except when specified in Tournament Regulations. Players may wear a hat."

Section 5.1.2 says. "For FIVB World Competitions players of a given team must wear uniforms of the same colour and style, according to tournament regulations."

The only discriminatory rule I can find is section 2.4 where "The height of the net shall be 2.43 m for men and 2.24 m for women." The lower net heights for people 16 years and under do not discriminate between males and females.

The International Association of Athletics Federations Competition Rules 2012 – 2013…

http://www.iaaf.org/mm/Document/06/28/26/62826_PDF_English.pdf

Mentions this in Rule 138: "The Call Room Judges shall ensure that athletes are wearing the national or Club uniform clothing officially approved by their national governing body, that the bibs are worn correctly and correspond with start lists, that shoes, number and dimension of spikes, advertising on clothing and athletes’ bags comply with the Rules and Regulations and that unauthorised material is not taken into the arena."

Rule 142 starts: "In all events, athletes must wear clothing which is clean, and designed and worn so as not to be objectionable. The clothing must be made of a material which is non-transparent even if wet."

The next sentence made me laugh: "Athletes must not wear clothing which could impede the view of the Judges."

The judge's view of what exactly, is not clarified!

I may have missed something in 287 pages but that's it for the IAAF's rules on uniforms and I couldn't find any discriminatory dress codes.

At least we're starting to rule out any regulatory discrimination at an international organisation level.

I seem to recall a certain Ozzie lady 400 Meters runner winning gold in a full body suit, including hood. It would probably have fulfilled muslim requirements.

I don't give a damn what outfit they wear, but if they want my taxes to support their effort, the swimmers had better do a better job of enabling me to pick them out, when they are racing. This business of some wearing a yellow cap, & some in some probably designer thing of almost white, with a bit of green & yellow that could not be seen is not good enough.

This is particularly important with the "B" grade commentator, who was more interested in reciting his research of someones past glories, than calling a race. Perhaps channel 9 should try contracting some horse race callers. They at least should be able to tell us what's happening in a 8 starter field.

Bouquets to the sailors, rowers canoeists [kayakers], & the track & field, & cyclists, who we could pick out of the crowd.

Wm Trevor

The dress codes for women’s beach volleyball – requiring them to wear high cut bikini briefs with no more than 6 cm width at the sides – were strictly enforced for the Sydney Olympics and also at the Athens Olympics (but I can’t find the official code for Beijing).

However, both the FIVB and the IOC relaxed the beach volleyball rules for the London Olympics late last year and earlier this year respectively. This was mainly in response to protests from Muslim and other nations with more modest dress codes, which claimed women who could not wear the designated outfits for cultural or religious reasons were effectively banned from competition.

While this is something of a hollow victory for Western feminism, it does at least give Western women more cultural premission to cover up more, without the usual accusations of feminist wowserism or expectations to kowtow to the perve factor to get sponsorship.

And on the topic of more relaxed beach volleyball dress rules, check out this pic of the beach volleyball match between Australia and USA on 7 August. So much for women wanting to wear as little clothing as possible when given a choice … or perhaps it was just a very cold day!

http://www.enstarz.com/articles/5027/20120807/womens-beach-volleyball-olympics-2012-aug-7-will-there-be-a-team-usa-vs-team-usa-final-matchup-live-stream.htm