Women’s gymnastics is legal child abuse
thecorrespondent.comOne thing that always surprises me about gymnastics is how inherently sexist it is. For nearly all sports, the male version of the sport is identical to the female version. Maybe women don't lift as much, don't run quite as fast, or do shorter distances (like in speed skating), but the basics of the sport are the same. Not so in gymnastics: men and women do entirely different things. Men are all about upperbody strength, women are all about flexibility and elegance. They're basically completely different sports, which I guess goes a long way to explain why athletes peak at totally different ages.
What if a female gymnast wants to do the horizontal bar or other "male" events? And even when they do have the same event in name, like the floor, they're still different for unnecessary reasons. For example, women have music, men don't. Why?
Obviously there are biological reasons why women aren't as strong, maybe it's unreasonable to expect women to do a heavy event like the rings, but most events could be equally accessible to everybody. But the sport itself forces athletes into very gender-specific roles. I can't help but wonder if unifying the sport may help to reduce this kind of abuse as well.
The flexibility at least is a play to strengths in one of the few areas where men were at a disadvantage athletically. Women on average are more flexible and their lower spines retain more juvenile flexible as it is useful for a shift in center of mass with pregnancy. Upper body strength was the male answer for "what can they do which is more impressive if they are higher mass and worse at physical flexibility"? The why may have something to do with performance peaks attracting more attention for a sport (I would have expected at least a niche for upper body strength events for women and flexibility for men) but that could also be a chicken and egg thing with culture.
There certainly is sexist baggage involving women being considered more "ornamental" though.
I played college volleyball about a decade ago and made the first team. We trained with the womens team on some days and as one of the more even sports - the chasm in athletic ability was insurmountable. So we mixed teams when playing and never one versus the other.
My point is, where one falls short, play to your strengths. Doubly so in a competitive environment. Nothing stopping female athletes from doing rings. Absolutely nothing. Just like there was nothing stopping women from joining the mens junior or senior VB teams.
Rings is not an event in women's gymnastics, as rhythm is not an event in men's, except for a few countries.
>One thing that always surprises me about gymnastics is how inherently sexist it is. For nearly all sports, the male version of the sport is identical to the female version. Maybe women don't lift as much, don't run quite as fast, or do shorter distances (like in speed skating), but the basics of the sport are the same.
The rule differences between ice hockey for men and women are such that I've heard it said that they might as well be different sports.
Even in track and field, the diffrence in the height of the hurdles between the men's 110m hurdles and the women's 100m hurdles makes them very different activities.
>how inherently sexist it is
Let's talk about Beachvolleyball too.
What is the difference between the male and female version?
Women forced by their dress codes to wear revealing clothing.
Didnt that change 2012 Olympics?
Yes leggins are allowed now....
https://www.bustle.com/articles/171814-what-is-the-2016-olym...
"beach volleyball players are now also allowed to wear shorts and a top. While the top can be sleeved or sleeveless, the shorts are limited to a maximum length of three centimeters (1.18 inches) above the knee"
As far as I can see in that article, the dress code is now very similar between the gender in what they are allowed to wear (through it is possible that male players can go topless?).
> What if a female gymnast wants to do the horizontal bar or other "male" events?
The same thing that happens if I want to be a movie star or heiress.
> how inherently sexist it is
Something is sexist when you create sex criteria. So the whole sport is sexist since you have distinguish between men and women categories in most of the disciplines.
What really surprised me is the existence of chess championship and women chess championship.
If creating another league increases interest and access, it's good to have another league.
I suppose so, but if there's one sport where men and women should be able to compete on equal footing, I'd expect it to be chess. I'm surprised the Polgar sisters are still an exception.
Not really. Sexism is a prejudice.
It is sexist to have a male and female version of the sport. Are you implying sexism in this context is wrong?
Read the comment again pls.
Men in general don't like to perform to music, or see no need for it, as you say "biologicaly".
Women on the other hand like it, "biologicaly" as you say.
Why is it wrong to have different events for men and women?
> Men in general don't like to perform to music, or see no need for it, as you say "biologicaly". Women on the other hand like it, "biologicaly" as you say.
Yeah, that is why male dancers and male dancing is non-existend worldwide.
Or otherwise said, can you prove it is "biological" rather then cultural?
How many males do you know how genuienly like dancing?
You are picking a small population of males and generlizing to all of them. Most males have no interest in dancing.
Nothing wrong if you do, but most don't.
This is a view on a very specific society you may be exposed to. Some counterexamples: morris dancing where organisations were/are pushing for men-only dancing, dancing related to folk/military (see the (in)famous "Russian soldiers dancing" Twitter) and a lot of dancing-with-weapons, early Tango with male only dancing, and honestly too much African dance culture to go into here with men-specific dances. Check out the ratios in street dance event videos on YouTube. See the teenagers practicing dance moves in groups in your city. It's the reverse. The modern European population and "guys don't dance" doesn't generalise.
I grew up in an environment where boys dancing was made fun of and I didn't realise liking to dance is an option. Some exposure to the world corrected that.
> You are picking a small population of males and generlizing to all of them.
Ironically enough, that is what you are doing.
There's a whole wide world (both historically and right now) of men/masculine culture beyond the weird bland repression certain parts of the West currently have going on. Even in the Western world, I don't know how one would go about telling e.g. Black American men that they have no interest in dancing.
Breakdance.
> How many males do you know how genuinely like dancing?
Quite a lot.
> Most males have no interest in dancing.
AFAICT, this "men aren't expected to want to dance" thing is an extremely recent, and fading, Western social norm, not some kind of biological fact that is culturally invariant.
Quite a few adults, actually? None of them did dancing in an organized club. But, that is cultural artefact too.
Also, I had to explain to my kids multiple times that laughing at or mocking boys dancing or ballet is neither fun nor ok. Obviously boys and men don't want to do things that make them be cast as effeminate or mocked.
> "You are picking a small population of males and generlizing to all of them."
No, that's what you're doing. Just because some men don't like dancing, no men should get the opportunity to do so? And because some women like to dance, it has to be a staple of the female version of the sport?
If it's actually about dancing, then make it a dancing event that men and women can compete in. Tons of men dance competitively. But not in gymnastics. Which actually makes sense, since it's gymnastics, not dancing. But then why are the women's events about dancing?
Most of them, that i know?
This is more cultural/social than sex/biological based.
I see you’ve never heard of the country of India among many many others.
What you are describing is machismo Americana, not men.
Machismo is latin, and latin machismo men dance.
It has nothing todo with gymanstics or womens, it's the whole highend sport at a young age, same with Ballet, Icehockey, Tennis, Cycling and playing piano. It should be banned and the parents and the coach punished. And ask you for what? Just for having a goldmedal for your goddamn country.
It seems like a good first step would be to set the minimum age to compete at world championships or the olympics at 16 or 17 or maybe even 20. Then delaying puberty wouldn't be a thing because everyone will have passed it.
> It seems like a good first step would be to set the minimum age to compete at world championships or the olympics at 16 or 17 or maybe even 20. Then delaying puberty wouldn't be a thing because everyone will have passed it.
Delaying puberty will still be a thing because people that end up competing at the top levels start training intensely long before they are eligible to compete.
Its not like someone wakes up one day and says "I think I'd like to be an Olympic gymnast", trains for a few months, and competes at the Olympics.
There have been multiple accusations of age falsification. If winning simply becomes a matter of faking a passport, several countries would be happy to do so.
Sounds like a great way to get a multi sport IOC ban. Those athletes that win medals will get intense international scrutiny, I suspect consistent faking of records will get found out eventually.
Anyways, just because some participants may cheat doesn’t inherently mean a rule isn’t worth making.
They could disqualify entire countries if that happens. But it would also help to change the events and the scoring so it doesn't encourage underage abuse. Man apparently need to be a lot older to compete. How about mixing the events a bit more so women compete on the same grounds as men? I find it really weird that men's and women's gymnastics are basically completely different sports.
Is it possible to reliably and non-invasively determine someone's age ± 1 year?
Athlete's do doping checks all the time. Might as well do a single-time age check as well.
No. This is a question that comes up in the UK in the context of unaccompanied irregular migrants. If they're under 18, local authorities have certain responsibilities towards them, over 18 not.
They do age exams, looking at various physical features, but it's fairly error prone and not that precise.
True. What about a minimum height? Like 5’3” or so?
> True. What about a minimum height? Like 5’3” or so?
That's above the median adult female height in many countries. And gymnasts (even at full adult height), of both genders, tend to skew short.
That’s discrimination.
At what age should a kid be allowed to buy a skateboard?
Whatever age the parents can afford comprehensive health insurance at...
Well my parents didn't do that and I still got a skateboard.
Reading this reminds me of the article on a 17-year-old girl who joined Nike: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/07/opinion/nike-running-mary...
HN discussion on that one:
Would raising the minimum age for Olympics and other high-level competition for women to 18 or 20 help?
I would think so. Part of the problem here is that they're trying to get these girls to win before puberty changes their body, which puts enormous time pressure on the training. If they're only allowed to compete from 18, all of those issues drop away.
Why? They'd still train and body modify while waiting to compete.
Pro sports have age minimums but kids start prepping at age 8.
This problem with women's gymnastics is the rules of the sport favor children's and childlike bodies.
Let’s not forget about the disgusting sexual abuse they have to suffer from, under the premise of medical treatments. They caught Nassar in 2018 but god knows how many others are still out there.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/31/well/live/pelvic-massage-...
Wow, where are the parents? I mean bad parents here and there I expect, but enough to fuel an international industry is a surprise...
> where are the parents?
Sometimes the kids hide the abuse from their parents.
And I imagine some parents push their children into these situations because they want their children to "succeed".
When my daughter came to me in tears and complained coach is yelling at her, I explained this is a good thing. This means coach is looking at her and is trying to correct her mistakes.
> “I fall off the beam and land badly, and I’m hurting. The coach unleashes a torrent of curse words, yelling at me to get up again. I wait too long. ‘Get your butt up there right now or I’ll make you wish you had.’”
> “He grabs me by the throat with both hands and lifts me into the air by my neck ... I hear him clearing his throat, followed by the sound of spitting, and feel a thick glob splat into my face.”
You should read the article.
Small kids are not as good as verbalizing what happens. Meaning, at the age when this all starts, they will not put it into words like this.
There is also strong cultural assumption that if coach is tough it is good. When kids are complaining, typically unable to explain exactly what the issue is, they are talked about as spoiled by helicopter parents or oversensitive moms.
So, even parents who eventually take their own kids away dont treat the whole thing as systematic abuse issue - they talked about it as personal preference of the kid.
> There is also strong cultural assumption that if coach is tough it is good.
There is some of that, but more a factor is that the measure of "good" is competitive success, and by that measure lots of tough -- even outright abusive -- coaches are good. You have to face that head-on to deal with the problem, that its not just a mistaken assumption of quality but often a flawed (because it does not view clear and visible verbal/emotional/physical abuse short of [but which can easily be a surface behind which hides] sexual abuse as a problem so long as success is achieved) but objective standard of quality.
It is really just not only that. Though is seen a good among some people even if results are not superior. You can't be widely incompetent, but beyond that there is a lot of subjectivity.
The actual competitive level will hurt either way, but the abuse itself is not actually raising performance.
If you look at Larry Nassar scandal, he did not had superior measurable results. He just created aura of superiority around him. Altrought he was not framing himself as tough, he pretended to be gentle doctor.
Thanks to you, I no longer need to.
A coach can correct mistakes without yelling.
"He's yelling at me because he cares" is the same internal logic that keeps many women in abusive romantic relationships.
My niece competed in gymnastics at national level, just steps to be olympic competitor she started at i believe like 8 YO, her coach never yelled at her or any of the group other than in an encouraging way. There are bad and good coaches out there some of them leave their life for the sport.
I can give another example.
Sometimes kids overwork their heart and coach is supposed to stop the kid to protect their health. Coach can't tell the kid in front of the group "You worked too hard, come stand here and rest", this would make the whole group to feign being overworked. Instead the coach is saying "You're not working hard enough, come here and stand in front of the group as a punishment for being lazy".
As a former educator, that is a horrible way to deal with that situation. The kid learns the wrong lesson and feels terrible about it. Lazy adult "solutions" like that can traumatize children.
The proper solution is just tell the kid to take a breather without stating a reason (maybe tell them privately how to notice on their own when they are overworking themselves). The other kids won't notice or care.
(And if some kid is looking for an excuse not to do the exercises... why are they even there? And who cares? It's an extracurricular, the point is to get out of it what you put in. It's not boot camp.)
It is not a prison. Everyone is free to go and never return. These kids are not there to learn a lesson. They are there to become champions.
Sure, they are there to be champions. And every girl goes to Cali to be a star. But at what cost and to what gain and at what odds are all questions parents need to consider. The article largely agrees that the way it’s done is according to the incentives. It’s the job of parents to say nope when the enterprise is to the detriment of the long term health of the child. Which is why I largely blame the parents not the coaches. The parents are PAYING for precisely this treatment and it’s grotesque.
That is horrible way of dealing with it.
First, you are literally punishing kid for being overworked, while claiming they are slackers are teaching them to overwork themselves even more next time.
The harder the kids try, the more the kid will be punished and claimed to be lazy.
Second, you are lying to the kids, they have no way to actually figure out rules.
> A coach can correct mistakes without yelling.
Are you a professional coach or just think it would work this way?
The athletes we are discussing are already selected as fit for the specific sport. All of them are very tolerant to stress from the training and competition. Unless stress of not doing exercise (correctly) is higher than stress from doing it (correctly) there won't be progress.
What for an outsider looks like abuse, for athletes is within tolerable limits.
Not the parent nor a professional coach but you wrote: "my daughter came to me in tears and complained coach is yelling at her".
That doesn't sound like being selected for stress tolerance. That sounds a lot more like stress tolerance is being mentally beaten into them.
Selection is for physical capabilities (experienced coaches are actually looking at both parents in addition to child assessment). Stress tolerance is built up gradually as a side effect.
Does it matter? Surely having a reasonable environment is a far higher priority than "being a champion".
You are part of the problem of abuse and I pray that you chose finds an adult they can trust.
So why do people believe this behaviour is legal?
Tough training is kind of an abuse. Why brings sex in the table when they can talk about training abuse on both sex?
As pointed out in the article, 14- to 16-year-old girls often win gymnastics championships (and in fact nobody over the age of 20 has won the olympic all-around since 1972), whereas no man under the age of 20 has ever won an olympic all-around. Being a grown adult is a huge advantage in men's gymnastics and a massive disadvantage in women's.
(I have a kid of each gender in local gymnastics programs and I have to carefully keep this stuff in mind. It's great that the kids are strong, and gymnastics makes people absurdly strong, but I don't think I would ever let my daughter anywhere near a high-level competitive program.)
The last part is great.
My children always liked sport but I told them that this is for their fun and not a medal for the organization (they were never interested in the competition part).
They switched sports either when it was getting boring or they felt that the competition part was over the fun one.
This does not mean that they abondonned early, but for instance both stopped karate after their black belt, to do rock climbing or ping pong. Because the fun was gone.
It sounds like you might have the experience required to explain what is different about men's gymnastics that causes it to not have this same youth bias?
No amount of verbal abuse is going to make a 15-year-old boy as strong as a 25-year-old man.
But why is strength important for male gymnastics but not for women gymnastics? The argument for women's gymnastics was that they are smaller and lighter weight and thereby can do crazier stunts... doesn't that apply to men? It just sounds like there is something fundamentally different to the sports themselves that I am not understanding as someone who knows nothing about either.
Two factors. First of all men's and women's gymnastics have some different events and different judging criteria for the events they have in common. On the whole the men's events and scoring criteria require more core and upper body strength to pull off successfully.
Secondly while the strength to weight ratio of women might peak at 15-18, in men it keeps increasing into their mid-late 20s. In general, the strength difference between a 15 and 25 year old man is much much greater than that between a 15 and 25 year old woman. Basically a 20-25 year old man can pull off feats of strength that a 15-16 year old simply can't. The same isn't really true for women (again in general).
I'm the same. My son struggled with his motor skills when he was little so we got him interested in gymnastics and he loves it and it's really helped. I'd like to do the same for my daughter when she's old enough but I'd hope she doesn't want go into competition. She also likes dance so that might be a better option.
FYI, Dance can have similar problems. I’m convinced a world reknowned ballet school had a major negative psychological effect on someone I know. Not sure how common that is in lesser schools, but something to be mindful of.
Yeah, I'm just thinking that dance seems less about the competition than gymnastics, so might be a healthier atmosphere.
Our gymnastics club has a kind of parkour club which seems more about having fun and being active which I think me might move my son to when he's old enough.
The ballet world has similar levels of competition and harmful psychological effects as women’s gymnastics. There are a huge number of girls and women competing for an extremely small number of available jobs as a full time professional dancer for a top-tier ballet company, of which there are only a small handful in the world. And almost everyone in ballet has struggled with disordered eating at some point, including the men.
It's not gynmastics that is child abuse, it is the bad behavior of coaches that is child abuse.
Let's not confuse the issues and terms, please.
This is exactly the idea that the article explains over and over to refute. Women's gymnastics by the scoring, culture, traditions, and biology, has all the incentives pushing toward child abuse. It isn't just a matter of pruning out bad actors. It is a matter of restructuring the sport to prevent bad actors from becoming prominent.
The whole point of the article is that women's gymnastics is set up in a way that requires coaches to act like this if they want to win medals.