Until 1968, women were required to prove their female sex by walking naked before a panel of male judges in order to compete in the Olympics, [Laura Robinson] reported. [More…] Another great CBC Sounds Like Canada find: Laura Robinson speaking about her recent book, Black Tights: Women, Sport and Sexuality. Lisa Bavington, a champion body-builder, quotes the following passage from Robinson’s book:
During the buildup to the Sydney Olympics, several women’s teams posed in the nude to raise some of the significant amounts of money need to compete internationally today. First it was the Australian soccer team when its members put together a calendar with full-frontal nudity. Then it was New Zealand’s eight in rowing.
Not to be left out in the cold, the members of the Canadian women’s Nordic ski team soon decided to produce their own nude calendar. The Nordic ski team may be go-getters when it comes to raising funds, but only when they sell a version of womanhood that in no way threatens traditional patriarchal values, and only when the money goes to them and their sport. Unfortunately, there are only so many sponsorship dollars, and as long as women athletes continue to promote themselves according to the narrow definition of how women are supposed to look and act, many others will lose out.
When I spoke to Jamie Fortier, in the fall of 2000, she had the following to say: “I’m a very strong anti-feminist. I think a lot of them have gone too far. I’m looking out for myself and I’m thinking for myself. We definitely were not told to do this calendar. We decided for ourselves.”
There’s a tremendous irony in Fortier’s remarks, of course, Women’s Nordic skiing was added to the Olympics only in 1964, and even then, it was only because women fought for its inclusion. It wasn’t until 1984 that women were allowed to ski any farther than 10 kilometers. Fortier calls herself “a very strong anti-feminist,” but without feminism, not only would she not have an Olympic event to compete in, she wouldn’t have the vote, the right to own property or hold public office, or the freedom to work at the job of her choice and be properly paid for it. She wouldn’t be able to go to university, and she would have to quit her job-if she’d been lucky enough in the first place-when she got married. In fact, it was because of feminists in 1929 that women legally became people in Canada, so I had to wonder what exactly did Fortier not like about the legacy she’d been left. [More…]
Bavington adds her thoughts, too: What exactly is it about feminism that evokes so many women to openly dismiss any association with being identified with the cause? I only managed to hear a fragment of the interview with Laura Robinson on CBC, but what struck me was her historical knowledge. She pinpointed precise years and events when things changed for women in terms of spectacle: the 14-year old gymnast (was it Nadia from Romania?) in the early 70s, whose successes and feats changed the body type of the ideal gymnast from “woman” to “girl,” the move, from that point on, for Olympic photographers to focus on “crotch shots,” and the regulations regarding dress (or lack thereof): did you know that women volleyball players are allowed a maximum of 7 cm (about 2.75″) of lycra covering their hips, while the men have to have a minimum of 20 cm covering theirs? Or that the women have to ask for official permission to put on a sweatshirt?
{ 6 comments }
My jaw dropped at several points during this essay — I did not know that competitors had to strip naked, or that several posed nude to raise money.
But I am not surprised as the pushback against feminism — wouldn’t want any of the men think we were unfeminine, now, would we?
I recently picked up a book about Ancient Greek athletries — female athletes — who competed in a separate games at the Olympics and elsewhere. Women could own horses and received credit for races run in the male games. They ran their own races, wearing loose-fitting robes that left one breast bare and probably didn’t have good coverage of the area around the hips.
There’s also the story of a woman who sneaked into the male-only games despite the death penalty for doing so. She revealed herself when her son won. The spectators took it in good humor and the official judges decided to commute the sentence to a hearty laugh according to accounts.
Check out the link to the article about Bonnie L. Basler under The Klansman Gravity Problem on my blog. It’s strange to think of Scientific American as a magazine that sells women as bodies, but there you have it.
Wow… This is one interesting post on a subject one rarely thinks of. Yule, you are doing some great ‘ethnography’ here for documenting the deeply entrenched sexism (misogyny too?) in just about every aspect of society and culture.
[I am still tired from my trip and the amount of work that I have been doing since getting back … so I am not that eloquent … but wanted to let you know I appreciate the posts!]
Wow… This is one interesting post on a subject one rarely thinks of. Yule, you are doing some great ‘ethnography’ here for documenting the deeply entrenched sexism (misogyny too?) in just about every aspect of society and culture.
[I am still tired from my trip and the amount of work that I have been doing since getting back … so I am not that eloquent … but wanted to let you know I appreciate the posts!]
I recently picked up a book about Ancient Greek athletries — female athletes — who competed in a separate games at the Olympics and elsewhere. Women could own horses and received credit for races run in the male games. They ran their own races, wearing loose-fitting robes that left one breast bare and probably didn’t have good coverage of
the area around the hips.
There’s also the story of a woman who sneaked into the male-only games despite the death penalty for doing so. She revealed herself
when her son won. The spectators took it in good humor and the official judges decided to commute the sentence to a hearty laugh according to accounts.
Check out the link to the article about Bonnie L. Basler under The Klansman Gravity Problem on my blog. It’s strange to think of Scientific American as a magazine that sells women as bodies, but there you have it.
Yeah, Yeah. We Scots are always getting asked “What do you wear under your kilt?”.
And I give the same tired old answer “Socks and shoes, we don’t go barefoot any more”. Butt(sic!) you’re right, Yule, the guys are perves.
Stu
Comments on this entry are closed.