WAG IGC requiring female campers to wear shorts or leggings

[gymmomx2]

I am not in favor of forcing established gymnasts to switch to shorts/leggings if they are not comfortable with that but I do think raising a new generation of gymnasts whose standard uniform is a leo with shorts or leggings is a good idea

THIS. Shorts were part of the mandatory team workout attire at our first gym. My DD got used to it and still prefers to wear shorts to this day.

 

[bogwoppit]

So many folks are just talking about the physical abuse portion - what Nassar did - but the soft porn portion is such a biggest issue with this sport. Up to a couple of years ago, these types of photos are being sold on regular ebay disguised as gymnastics stock photos. I think they have cracked down on it quite a bit but you can bet it is still out there, deeper in the web.

I am not in favor of forcing established gymnasts to switch to shorts/leggings if they are not comfortable with that but I do think raising a new generation of gymnasts whose standard uniform is a leo with shorts or leggings is a good idea. No, I don't view this as victim shaming. I view it as providing an extra layer of protection (no, not physical) against porn predators. We protect our kids in various ways against lots of dangers and never once think of our protections as victim shaming. Why do it here, with clothes? And I do think this needs to be sport wide, not individual gyms. It needs to be presented as a universal front

FIG already provides for this. It has been an option for years. Pedos will get their kicks no matter what we do.

 

[gymmomx2]

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/aly...vent-abuse-form-victim-shaming-095809029.html

Changing the norm of what is appropriate attire for gymnastics isn't victim blaming. It can't be the victim's fault when they are wearing the standard accepted uniform for the activity. BUT...can we not change our perception of what's acceptable? Who decided that leotards with high leg cuts were desirable for "body lines" anyway? Personally and I hope I'm wrong but I believe many creeps are attracted to gymnastics due to the attire. Pure and simple. Normal people won't assault and abuse no matter what a person wears but a pedophile probably prefers attending gymnastics meets rather than hockey tournaments. Sure it's wrong but it still happens and no amount of victim empowerment will prevent that from happening.

And yes, FIG allows for shorts/leggings/etc but people do so mostly for religious reasons. Technically allowable and culturally acceptable are not the same and the divide is wide.

 

[gymgal]

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/aly...vent-abuse-form-victim-shaming-095809029.html

I find this short sighted, not only on her part but on those who view a uniform change as simple victim shaming. I know this mentality comes from the whole "debate" (wrong word but couldn't think of another, hence the quotes) of blaming a rape victim for the clothes she wore but this is not the same thing. Is everyone also against the new policy of where photographers can stand and at what angles photos and videos can be taken? Because these are rules to protect our girls from potential porn shots. By the same thinking, are we not telling the girls that what they are doing with their bodies are shameful and should not be photographed from certain angles? Angles, which by the way are the best way to capture such amazing feats/heights/angles. Personally, again, I view it as a necessary step to reduce potential harm.

FIG already provides for this. It has been an option for years. Pedos will get their kicks no matter what we do.

Being optional (and getting deducted for going against the grain) is not the same as providing a united front. Yes Pedophiles will get their kicks but we don't have to make it so easy for them.

 

[bogwoppit]

I find this short sighted, not only on her part but on those who view a uniform change as simple victim shaming. I know this mentality comes from the whole "debate" (wrong word but couldn't think of another, hence the quotes) of blaming a rape victim for the clothes she wore but this is not the same thing. Is everyone also against the new policy of where photographers can stand and at what angles photos and videos can be taken? Because these are rules to protect our girls from potential porn shots. By the same thinking, are we not telling the girls that what they are doing with their bodies are shameful and should not be photographed from certain angles? Angles, which by the way are the best way to capture such amazing feats/heights/angles. Personally, again, I view it as a necessary step to reduce potential harm.


Being optional (and getting deducted for going against the grain) is not the same as providing a united front. Yes Pedophiles will get their kicks but we don't have to make it so easy for them.

I just cannot agree.

 

[John]

I really don't want to post but feel I must.

A gymnast should be able to wear any combination of leotard and shorts legging she desires. Anyone who wants to decide what someone else should wear or thinks they can decide what is appropriate for someone else is part of the problem, not the solution. This is the athletes/parent decision.

Mandated Camera angles etc will be defeated by the pedophile pretending to be a family member with a telescopic lens. To think otherwise is naive.

The only protection is education and zero tolerance for abuse.

My two cents.

 

[gymmomx2]

I really don't want to post but feel I must.

A gymnast should be able to wear any combination of leotard and shorts legging she desires. Anyone who wants to decide what someone else should wear or thinks they can decide what is appropriate for someone else is part of the problem, not the solution. This is the athletes/parent decision.

Mandated Camera angles etc will be defeated by the pedophile pretending to be a family member with a telescopic lens. To think otherwise is naive.

The only protection is education and zero tolerance for abuse.

My two cents.

You're going to educate pedophiles? What about the abuse you don't know is happening because they are using a telephoto lens? Just live with it because there's nothing you can do? What about making it less attractive for them to take those pictures?

Respectfully I take offense to your opinion that I'm part of the problem because I think children would be better protected if the attire for gymnastics were less revealing. I agree it should be left to the gymnast/parent but that is realistically not the case today. We can't tell our gym that she'll wear shorts at the next competition thank you very much.

 

[bogwoppit]

You're going to educate pedophiles? What about the abuse you don't know is happening because they are using a telephoto lens? Just live with it because there's nothing you can do? What about making it less attractive for them to take those pictures?

John never said he was going to educate pedophiles.

 

[gymmomx2]

John never said he was going to educate pedophiles.

My apologies, I misunderstood. Who are we educating and what are we teaching that would prevent creeps from taking crotch shots of the kids?

 

[2G1B]

So many folks are just talking about the physical abuse portion - what Nassar did - but the soft porn portion is such a biggest issue with this sport. Up to a couple of years ago, these types of photos are being sold on regular ebay disguised as gymnastics stock photos. I think they have cracked down on it quite a bit but you can bet it is still out there, deeper in the web.

I am not in favor of forcing established gymnasts to switch to shorts/leggings if they are not comfortable with that but I do think raising a new generation of gymnasts whose standard uniform is a leo with shorts or leggings is a good idea. No, I don't view this as victim shaming. I view it as providing an extra layer of protection (no, not physical) against porn predators. We protect our kids in various ways against lots of dangers and never once think of our protections as victim shaming. Why do it here, with clothes? And I do think this needs to be sport wide, not individual gyms. It needs to be presented as a universal front

I can tell you, this type of thing is all over ebay and I'm pretty sure that this is the seller that used to put "sexy" along with photos like this. It certainly wouldn't hurt for the girls to have a little more coverage than a leo provides (this was a quick look, I'm sure that there are worse out there). This also does concern me for what happens to the photos taken by photographers years from now. I imagine that they will just delete them; but back in the day those photos were around and apparently a lot ended up in thrift stores or something.
Link Removed

 

[John]

We educate our children and ourselves. We control the things we can control. We raise our boys and our girls in the same exact manner. We do our best to remember history or it repeats itself. I do not want my daughter to have to go to the beach or the pool in a 1920 bathing suit or wear a burka. I want her to be proud of herself and dress in the way she feels comfortable. She is a human being and deserves all the rights of her male counterparts. If she chooses to be skins or shirts in a game of ball I support whatever team she decides is appropriate for her.

None of this ever again.

 

[gymmomx2]

We educate our children and ourselves. We control the things we can control. We raise our boys and our girls in the same exact manner. We do our best to remember history or it repeats itself. I do not want my daughter to have to go to the beach or the pool in a 1920 bathing suit or wear a burka. I want her to be proud of herself and dress in the way she feels comfortable. She is a human being and deserves all the rights of her male counterparts. If she chooses to be skins or shirts in a game of ball I support whatever team she decides is appropriate for her.

None of this ever again.
View attachment 7166

Hate to point out the obvious but men are mandated to wear shorts and pommel pants. Fully agree females deserving the rights of males, but even males have mandatory attire for gymnastics. Tell me again why we can't mandate the same for girls?

 

[profmom]

Gymgal, like 2G1B, I just spent a few minutes searching. That stuff is out there and is very, very easy to find. I saw on Flickr an entire gallery of photos that appeared to have been taken at a minor JO meet, probably Level 7 or so. If you find that gallery and then look at the galleries of people who liked the pictures, it's perfectly clear what is going on. I do not see any simple solution to this problem unless private photography is banned at meets. I know USAG is doing what it can with banning some kinds of lenses, but having taken tons of pictures myself with cameras that aren't all that souped up, I know that's not going to stop anyone except at really big meets. If indeed this is the problem IGC is trying to solve, I wish them well.

And John, it is not between athlete and parent. Not at all. The coaches are making most of the decisions here, and they have to be persuaded to change if change is to happen. It would be nice, though, if the leo manufacturers would stop with the ridiculous cuts and if the college coaches who refuse to buy leos that fit would recognize that an AM leo can be ordered without the world coming to an end. Gymnastics is an aesthetic sport, of course, but aesthetics are driven by norms and we collectively can change them.

Furthermore, the question of agency is more complicated with children. If a 20 year old wants to choose a sexualized self presentation, that is one thing, but it's a really different thing if that bleeds down to become in effect a requirement for a prepubescent girl. I do think there is some turf to stand on from which you can advocate for a wider range of acceptable competitive and workout attire that does not constitute body shaming. However, the space within which there are actual choices has to be created.

John, please note that the boys have rules as well. They don't get to wear whatever they want, not for workouts and not for competitions.

 

[skschlag]

Hate to point out the obvious but men are mandated to wear shorts and pommel pants. Fully agree females deserving the rights of males, but even males have mandatory attire for gymnastics. Tell me again why we can't mandate the same for girls?

I was trying to type this out earlier but could not word it correctly. Thanks

 

[bogwoppit]

Hate to point out the obvious but men are mandated to wear shorts and pommel pants. Fully agree females deserving the rights of males, but even males have mandatory attire for gymnastics. Tell me again why we can't mandate the same for girls?

For me it is about the reasons why you want to mandate it.

 

[Flippin'A]

Did I miss somewhere that IGC said this was about pictures? My daughter's too young to go to camp, so maybe I don't have all the information. The statement I read specifically said this was in response to "the current issues facing USA Gymnastics" which everyone understands to be Nassar. If that's the case, then yes, this is victim shaming because it implies that wearing more clothing can stop a pedophile. If someone told me that a men's gymnastics program started requiring shirts after an abuse case came to light then I would call that victim shaming too. Women have plenty of clothing requirements that were not created as a result of abuse.

We need to start moving toward personal choice, especially for the kids. If your child wants to wear shorts and isn't being allowed to, maybe it's time to step up and demand it. Should we allow spectators to take pictures at meets? Should gyms be allowed to share pictures online? I'm not trying to be flip, but these are the questions we're going to be confronted with as we go further down this path. And at a certain point we're going to have to decide how much clothing is enough. Do booty shorts provide enough coverage, or should they all go to mid thigh? From there we start asking whether they should all be wearing long sleeves at practice. I hate the modern high cut leos as much as anyone else, but what I object to is the reason that IGC gave for requiring shorts.

 

[John]

And John, it is not between athlete and parent. Not at all. The coaches are making most of the decisions here, and they have to be persuaded to change if change is to happen.

John, please note that the boys have rules as well. They don't get to wear whatever they want, not for workouts and not for competitions.

Again I agree with you. The problem is coaches make the decision. My suggestion is that the athlete and the parent make the decision. The clothing can be mandated. Tell me my daughter can wear a leo, leo with shorts, leo with leggings, long sleeve, or short sleeve. My daughter and I will then pick what is best for her and her family.

 

[gymmomx2]

They just said "to ensure that gymnastics is a safe sport from abuse", some saw it as a reference to physical abuse as it relates to Nassar, others like myself saw a broader scope that encompasses other kinds of abuse.

 

[skschlag]

I wish they did that with the boys...but they are typically mandated on what to wear.

 

[profmom]

And my point remains that we cannot know whether it's victim shaming or not until IGC explains what they are doing. Why don't we wait and see? If they come out with a statement that their policy is an attempt to swim headway against the norms for competitive attire in the gymnastics world and provide proof that athletes can do beautiful gymnastics in shorts that can be recognized as such, then I hope at least a few people will give it a little consideration. And if they couple that with an explanation (a vague one if necessary) of new measures they are taking to keep photos of campers from winding up in the possession of pedophiles, I am all for it. I send my kid to IGC to go to camp, have some fun, and maybe learn a thing or two, not for him to become the unknowing star in some creep's fantasy life. (Yes, Virginia, the creepy galleries are not limited to girls.)

I also fail to see the usefulness in slippery slope arguments. I don't see anywhere in IGC's policy the hint that all female athletes are going to be put in burkas.