In the early 20th century, as more and more women started to play sports, the sexism of the time followed right beside them. Infiltrating the public’s opinion, the sports’ rules and expectations, and most noticeably, the uniforms, the over-sexualization of female athletes is nothing new. This phenomenon makes itself present, though less overtly than in the past, with current sport dress codes. Of course, this should not be the case, and the over-sexulization of women, more specifically girls, needs to stop.
In the early 1900s, most uniforms were characterized by extreme modesty—long sleeves and pants or skirts covered nearly every inch of skin. In sports like tennis, women would wear long dresses to the ankle, boots, and hats.
By the mid-century, sports uniforms became a bit more revealing as women’s sports started to become more frequently televised in the 60’s. Women’s basketball players, for example, wore shorts and short-sleeved shirts when they played. This trend continued; the popularity of women’s sports rose along with the amount of skin that was socially acceptable to show.
Now, many women’s sports dress codes are looser, and athletes are freer to wear what’s comfortable. However, while dress codes like the Norwegian women’s handball team—who fought and won against the European Federation’s decision to enforce bikini-bottomed uniforms—are much improved, there are still elements that need to be changed. What athletes are provided with still retain elements of over-sexualization. This is especially worrying in youth sports teams, where kids can’t as easily advocate for change.
Over my years playing soccer, I’ve noticed many of the provided shorts are strangely short. While this could just be chalked up to my height, I’ve noticed that the upper-mid thigh length of women’s shorts persisted across all the various heights of my team, regardless of the size on the tag.
The boys’ by comparison never seemed to go above mid-thigh and had a much looser fit than the girls’ did. I’ve heard people say that this is because women have wider hips. However, if this is true, shouldn’t the waistband change, and not the inseam?
Looking at sizing charts, I’ve noticed an anomaly between men’s and women’s sizes. In the men’s category, to fit a waist size of 26 inches to 29 ¼ inches, the length of the shorts are 15 inches. However, the womens’, with the same waist sizing is only 15 inches long.
Another soccer website I came across sold women’s shorts that had an inseam less than half of the men’s: four inches to nine!
What’s the purpose of having shorter pants? Some might say that it feels better when moving; I know people on my soccer teams sometimes roll up their shorts when playing. All this is fair: different people might have different levels of what they are comfortable with doing. However, especially with provided uniforms, while you can always roll them up, there is no way to add fabric.
But why does short length matter so much? Comfortability is one of the most important aspects of any sports uniform, allowing players to perform their best and focus on the game. However, while physical comfort is important, so is feeling comfortable. Having shorts that are noticeably shorter than boys’ uniforms and that over-sexualize girls takes away from that feeling.
