Dr. Daniela Schaaf
Associated Scientist at German Sport University Cologne. She teaches and conducts research at the intersection of sports, media and culture. Her next book about sport documentaries (together with Jörg-Uwe Nieland and Dietrich Leder) will be published in 2025.
Email: Daniela.schaaf@icloud.com
Dr. Jörg-Uwe Nieland
Senior Scientist at the Alpen-Adria-Universität Klagenfurt and associate at the Institute for European Sport Development and Leisure Research at the German Sport University Cologne. His work focuses on sport mediatization, sport policy, politics in sport, and media development.
Email: joerg-uwe.nieland@gmx.net
Twitter: @JoergUweNieland
The history of sport and the Olympic Games cannot be told and researched without women. A monumental achievement was celebrated at the 2024 Olympic Games in Paris: For the first time in history, there was complete gender parity, as the IOC allocated quota places to female and male athletes on a 50:50 basis. This also applies to media coverage: women’s sports received 51.12% of the coverage while men’ sports received 47.04%. James R. Angelini and Paul J. MacArthurexplain, “Women’s sports have now received more coverage than men’s sports on NBC‘s primetime broadcasts in six of the past seven Olympic Games.”
However, these equality successes were marred in the run-up to the Olympic Games by the presentation of skimpy outfits for female athletes from outfitter Nike. The sportswear manufacturer was accused of subordinating functionality to the principle of “sex sells.” This reinforces a longstanding inequity in sports, one that puts the body of a female athlete on display in a way it does not for the male athlete. For years the old patriarchy of officials has been trying to make various disciplines “sexier” by dictating dress codes (e.g. beach volleyball, beach handball, tennis, etc.) in the hope of gaining more media attention.
In recent years, there have been public controversies about “the half-naked versus the covered,” as the biggest German newspaper BILD headlined. In 2021, the German gymnasts competed in full-body suits instead of revealing leotards at the European Gymnastics Championships. This campaign received widespread international media coverage: from the BBC, The New York Times and Times of India, the protest against sexualization in sports and a revolution in women’s gymnastics. These examples show that the sexualization and de-sexualization of the female body are two sides of the same coin. The public and often controversial debates are not only about the “right” clothing for female athletes but also about women’s rights and their restrictions, as well as the globally applicable (clothing) rules of professional sport (and the signal effect on clothing in recreational and school sports). What is new about this discourse is that the initiatives and activities to defend themselves against the rules imposed by the official patriarchy come from the female athletes themselves.
Sport has long been part of the “hyper-culture of commercial sexuality.” In this context, however, it should be noted that it is primarily federations, media, and sponsors that benefit from the sexualization strategy, with the individual athlete gaining very little (especially in monetary terms). But, in recent years, more and more sportswomen (and few men) have joined the erotic social media platform OnlyFans.com to decide for themselves how much of their bodies they want to show. They also earn more money because they no longer need managers and agencies to promote themselves. Although this platform is mainly used by former female athletes, at least five active Parisian Olympians have an account on Onlyfans.com. The best known is the Canadian pole vaulter and bronze medal winner Alysha Newman who made headlines for performing a twerk celebration. According to reports, Newman has added 20,000+ new subscribers since her Olympic performance. Her monthly rate is $7.79 per subscription, implying that she increased her income by over $150,000 per month – significantly more earnings than for her sporting success. In this context, the question arises as to how feminist the social media platform really is. An overabundance of postfeminist substitute identifications can be observed in the media, popular, and consumer culture. Using terms such as “self-empowerment” and “freedom of choice,” women are told that they have control over all aspects of their lives.
In particular, the buzzword “self-empowerment” is used to describe the equal rights efforts of women in this androcentric cultural space. In this way, female athletes receive confirmation from the media and sponsors for the presentation of their erotic capital in the form of coverage and well-paid advertising contracts. This attention is intended to lull them into the false sense of security that they have guardianship over their media self-presentation and a right of self-determination over their own bodies. Similar observations can be made on the social media platform OnlyFans.com: Here too, female athletes submit first and foremost to the male gaze. Because only if they meet the Western female beauty and erotic ideals, are male users willing to pay for a monthly subscription.
For future research on the (re)presentation of bodies, gender, and stereotypes in production, reporting, and reception the following questions arise: Is the de-sexualization of some women’s sports, such as beach volleyball or gymnastics, to be seen as a step backward? Conversely, does this protest/boycott mean that in the future, female athletes who continue to compete in scant outfits will be encouraging the sexualization of their bodies? Does the bikini or the full-body suit in professional sports now stand for self-determination and emancipation? The sports system must also allow itself to ask who is in charge of setting the (clothing) regulations of professional women’s sports and to what extent cultural or religious rules must be adhered to.
