I get a bit freaked out and don't like it

TheCatWoman said:

why is it always a vest and knickers?

My ex-wife developed a range of womens ware gym clothes for a chain if gyms in London a few years ago and we did a brainstorming session at the beginning to make sure we understood their thinking and what their customers are looking for.

There are 2 main element at play that are driving the move to more revealing gym clothes for women (and now men too) which seem relevant to your questions.

1 - there are performance benefits to the figure hugging outfit for anything from streamlining (especially for swimmers or runners) to the comfort and support that "performance" fabrics now offer - less need for a gym bra for many women when the top can have this built in for example.

Having a fabric that stays in place, doesn't wrinkle up or ride up in use gives confidence so the wearer can focus on what they are doing rather than if their clothes look ugly or are revealing their underwear.

2 - Body confidence has been growing amongst women for decades now and it is quite common for women to be proud of the body they have been shaping up in the gym and seem much more more willing to wear an outfit that would have been considered scandalous last century.

For a long time now women have been making a point that they are should be able to dress how they want and not suffer unwanted male advances and in my experience in the gyms in the UK and Brasil this is predominantly happening.

I realise that there is a quite different dynamic going on with televised sport and there has been too many instances of lingering camera shot on body parts but this is something that those who are offended by it have the power to change - call up the channel airing the show and complain and it will soon filter its way down to the camera person that their behaviour is causing complaints.

It is like what has happened in gyms - by making noise to the relevant responsible organisations you start to effect change. Take to social media and you add momentum - in essence be a part of the change you want to see.

All those athletics clothes look like they'd be a sensory nightmare, just looking at some of the fabrics makes my teeth itch. I know sensory sensitivities are quite individual, but are there any autistic athletes and how do they cope?

Partly.

It is ultimately about money. Even if the competitors are amateur and there is no prize money, it costs something to organise, run and provide medals and staff. This requires advertisers and TV, which depends on eyeballs. Whether it is reasonable is not the issue, I assume traditionally it worked.

Athletics is not a useful activity, so it is about entertainment, which means viewers. Else it is just a hobby or pass time.

Maybe the real answer is large female viewing figures for female athletics, with people practically dressed. But I don't know if that works.

Men wear long figure hugging knee length leggings, leotards could be made whole body or just differently designed, we're told that modern fabric technology has done aways with heat and drag being problems.

Skorts is a horrible word, like many portmanteau words it leaves me trying to work out what it means.

TheCatWoman said:

Wimbledon has a dress code too always white and women must wear skirts, no shorts, only men can wear shorts.

Women are allowed to wear white shorts or skirts.

In addition, there is a rule which permits mid coloured or dark undershorts provided they are no longer than the length of their skirt or shorts.

Many women players wear skorts now as they are very practical.

There are two reasons - the heat generated and aerodynamics. You couldn't run in a tracksuit or long shorts. I'm sure they can wear more or less what they want, except for the advertising. look at Wimbledon. They used to be covered in long skirts, then bloomers then tops got very short. Some of it might be exhibitionism too - after all, they have toned bodies and legs. 

TheCatWoman said:

it's one of those weird autistic things who's roots probably started with something so tiny and inconsequential as to not be noticed, but like a weed, had grown rampantly through my psyche. 

I find that - some things really grab at me and I ruminate for a long time - days, months, years. That funeral director case, for example, I keep thinking of the sentence [too short] and all the people affected. As humans, we have empathy and this just proves autistic people have strong feellings that are not perhaps expressed so publicly, so people assume we do not have deep and sometimes painful feelings. I don't think you are unusual at all!

The dress code still has a long way to go but as far as I know, the vest top can have sleeves and it doesn’t have to be cropped for many track events.

The Australian Women’s netball team had a raw deal this year. Their specially designed dresses kept riding up mid match and some of the players could be seen pulling them back down.

In my opinion, women gymnasts have the worst deal. Now a requirement for leotards is, without a doubt, sexist.

Wimbledon has a dress code too always white and women must wear skirts, no shorts, only men can wear shorts.

One of the odd things in sport and in cricket is that the overarm throw was developed by and used by women, the throwing arm didn't get caught up in skirts, previously all throws were underarm. Now men seem to think that women can't throw overarm properly.

I'm glad theres a fight back against this, I really cannot see why women can't wear knee or ankle length leggings the same as men do, or an all in one.

Yeah, pretty much this.

It's just sexism. Many men prefer women as sex objects. If you look back at tennis costumes for women, they used to be modest - although those long skirts must have really got in the way! I know women in sports are fighting it, these days, but those damned dress codes are designed by men for men.

It's a problem that goes beyond just sportswear. Society itself has been set up to favour the tastes of men and to suppress women's preferences to suit men. Women's clothes in general are designed less for the comfort of women and more for eyecandy for men to look at, sadly. Even during childhood, the things that are marketed to little girls are designed to brainwash them into perfect housewives who care about nothing but their looks and looking after their man's house and domestic affairs...

Some women feel empowered by the idea of looking attractive to men, so if that's the case for them, more power to them, but those who don't care about that are unfortunately unacknowledged or regarded as the minority. It's a frustrating reality that many people seem weirdly ok with accepting...

Have you ever seen the film "The Stepford Wives"? it very much sums up what society has been trying to do to women for years.

Sadly I think it's a choice between accepting the code or not doing it, though I assume there are some adjustments made for religions. 

Cricket wise I fear I'd look chubbier in white - What's the dress code?!

If it were purely the choice of he athlete I'd probably not believe you or at least question where you got this idea from and why you don't see some wearing other things, like knee length leggings or something.

Do you get female athletes who are Muslim and prefer to be covered? Or is it a choice between accepting athletic dress codes or not doing it at all?

Please don't join my club, I'm not a clubable person, except with a cricket bat, lol

It has been an issue for some years and it seems quite a few competitors don't like it.

Some women have started wearing different clothes, but the change is slow. People are allowed to wear other things, but sponsors, clothing brands, traditions, etc. create inertia.

If I told you it was completely the choice of the athlete would that make it better? 

Sadly I don't think it is - I think the governing bodies decide the dress code, which probably makes it worse given I suspect they're historically male.

It's not something I've ever thought about, but I'll join your club now I think it's rampant sexism!