Like NAM, I was not that surprised by the dance video, having been to many dance competitions. This one is extreme with the lingerie styled costumes that left nothing about the intention to the imagination combined with the moves and song. But this was only the logical conclusion of the culture at these competitions, and the constant attempts to push the limits. This dance likely did well (the kids are good dancers!) and they'll use that to justify it. But again...the kids are good dancers for their age (only about 7-9) so I'm guessing they could pull together quite a nice dance with anything.
And I agree not all cheer gyms have suggestive routines. Some are very sensitive to this. However I've seen mini or junior cheer routines that are about as suggestive in some of their content, though the costumes, no matter how skimpy they're cut, aren't as explicitly suggestive in their styling, so there's that at least. The costimes are the worst part of this performance imo...even if you think there's nothing wrong with letting kids dance like anything, surely it's wrong to dress them in costumes that have explicit overtones. There's no subletly in those outfits whatsoever. No adult looked that over and missed it. It's not the midriffs, it's not the tightness, it's the actual styling of the costume that is objectionable.
And I agree not all cheer gyms have suggestive routines. Some are very sensitive to this. However I've seen mini or junior cheer routines that are about as suggestive in some of their content, though the costumes, no matter how skimpy they're cut, aren't as explicitly suggestive in their styling, so there's that at least. The costimes are the worst part of this performance imo...even if you think there's nothing wrong with letting kids dance like anything, surely it's wrong to dress them in costumes that have explicit overtones. There's no subletly in those outfits whatsoever. No adult looked that over and missed it. It's not the midriffs, it's not the tightness, it's the actual styling of the costume that is objectionable.