The leotard in question is worn by the model on the far right who, even though she is cut off, visibly has her hands covering her groin area. Perhaps a re-design is in order?
If you’re too embarrassed to stand still on stage with it, competing isn’t gonna go well
Nike defended itself by noting that Team USA athletes not only have a choice between briefs and shorts but a wide variety of other outfit combinations. And the reigning Olympic pole vault champion, Katie Moon, criticized the notion that the uniforms are sexist. “Whether we feel best in a potato sack or a bathing suit during competitions, we should support the autonomy,” Moon, who is sponsored by Nike, wrote on Instagram.
Sounds to me like they can chose whatever cut they prefer. The outrage should be more directed at the advertisement choice than the actual product line.
Which is a very shitty take. If they advertised with a string tanga and those star-shaped things some stripers tape to their nipples, everyone would be upset as well (and rightfully so). It’s not a matter of choice, the proposition itself is an insult.
Thong and tassles next time
Go full ancient Greece and compete nude /s
This is ignorant. Would you want to be remembered for your performance, or your cameltoe?
Wait what? Didn’t OP just mean that if standing is already too revealing competing in it will be even more revealing? I don’t get the ignorance here.
Fair enough. I thought they meant that the other way around. I agree that it sure af doesn’t help in competition.
I feel you’ve misinterpreted the comment you’ve replied to.
Yeah. I did a dumb. Sorry about that.
Can I haz both?
Ideally you should be wearing boxers or briefs under your trousers or shorts.
NPR’s article shows more people and a male athlete is also in skimpy bottoms and rocking the fig leaf hands.
https://www.npr.org/2024/04/15/1244773342/nike-team-usa-women-uniform-revealing-olympics
Are you sure? To my understanding it’s about the high bikini line of the version on the right here: https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/Tb0lyB1mWx0d2hYJRxe.tQ--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTY0MDtoPTM2MDtjZj13ZWJw/https://media.zenfs.com/en/thedailybeast.com/e3aa711e17bc08efd060875613f4dc07
Looks more like shorts to me. You can see the Nike logo on the left thigh.
In another photo, you can see that it’s just shorts
I can’t be the only one to notice that Nike thinks that able women should be sexualized, but disabled ones should wear long pants. I’m not sure which women that is more insulting to.
Both. Each side of that equation makes the other one worse
There’s no sexism on sport. Wtf are you talking about?!
/s just in case.
What’s going on with Nike and their uniforms? The MLB ones are pretty bad where you can basically see through the pants, and now this.
Gotta grift somewhere. Make that fabric shear so we use less and just call it “breathable” and “form fitted.” And then charge em 3 times more.
I doubt anyone at Nike is giving two shits about the fabric savings for the Olympic team uniforms lol
Uniforms on the MLB side seem to be getting worse after the start of the season. There have been instances already of pants just ripping apart. Now, there have been sweat stain issues with the uniforms too. Some teams like the Mariners, Rangers, and Brewers are still waiting on full uniform sets. It’s been a chaotic mess.
Uniforms should be issued, not designed by the country. Some countries have invested $10,000s of dollars to ensure their athletes have the least amount of drag, namely in swimming. At that point, it isn’t the talent of the athlete, it’s the clothes. Put everyone on even playing ground clothes wise.
This would be my preference. The Olympic committee should put out a set of design and material guidelines, and each athlete can choose from that. That can have them printed with different patterns or whatever, but it must meet the guidelines. There should probably be several different shapes for “men” and “women” patterns that anyone can choose from any set.
Nudity all around!
The original Olympics were a bunch of greased up naked guys
They tied their foreskins shut so it was appropriate. (I’m not shitposting, Google it)
I hope they organize a “no shave” protest.
I thought the same thing. The article mentions Brazilian waxes, and my immediate thought was f-that. Go full bush. You wanna see what my junk is really like? Feel free to view it in its natural state.
Girls are much more likely than boys to drop out of competitive sports. It’s little wonder when revealing kits are highlighted on the global stage
It’s likely more to do with pay and societal pressures
Societal pressures like being sexy over being talented?
No, pressures to be a mom, take a quiet job, and be submissive
sensationalism at it’s best. they have other options to wear if they don’t want to wear that.
And that argument is discussed in the article. Doesn’t mean it isn’t sexist
how is it sexist? women are allowed to wear the mens gear if they want. it’s up to the athlete to choose.
Too bad the promotional image doesn’t show more than one option for each gender, and itself shows the different aesthetic expectations of men and women competing in the Olympics.
that’s a failure of the publication, not nike. like i said, it’s sensationalism at it’s best.
Removed by mod
A leotard shaped in a way that creates a fucking camel toe and unnecessarily rides up to nearly the hip bone is not “feminine distinction”
TERFs stop objectifying women challenge: impossible
Objectifyng isn’t funny unless women are objectifying themselfs selling nudes on the internet… LMAO…
Ok Google/Siri/Alexa what’s consent and why is it important?
There’s a world of difference between women (or men for that matter) engaging in a sexual activity on their own initiative by their own free will and a multinational trying to sexualize athletes against their will to sell more merchandise.
Economic coercion, what is it.
By that argument most jobs are immoral. I don’t understand why consenting to sex work is significantly different from consenting to working on a construction site. You could argue that without economic coercion no one would do such a job because of the negative health consequences and risks.
Could, and in fact would argue.
So go start a commune and live off the land. If everyone thought like you there would be no infrastructure, much less an internet for you to post this backwards take on.
You seem less ‘politically incorrect’ and more ‘arrogantly offensive.’
You didn’t even read the article.
I do I just like to pretend I don’t…
LMAO…
Hahaha…
