Assistant Professor, Ted Rogers School of Management, Ryerson University

Katie Lebel does not work, consult, own shares, or obtain funds from any company or organization that will benefit from this article, and does not disclose any related affiliation other than academic appointments.

Ryerson University provided funding as a founding partner of The Conversation CA.

Ryerson University provides funding as a member of The Conversation CA-FR.

Imagine watching your child fall in love with a sport. Imagine they are intoxicated by the thrill of brilliant shooting, full of the thrill of competitive success. Now imagine that when someone tells them to participate in a competition, their faces must be wearing bikini bottoms with a side width of only 3.9 inches.

Welcome to the women's sport.

Although gender discrimination is a common problem in women's clothing, chauvinism in sports is very obvious.

Recently, this display was emphasized when the International Handball Federation was asked to revise the uniform guidelines for athletes. Their rules stipulate that female beach handball players wear "tight bikini bottoms and cut them at an upward angle toward the top of their legs", clearly stating that the maximum "side width" is 10 cm.

After protests by the Norwegian national team, months of pressure and online petitions, the ruling coalition finally agreed to amend their unification agreement.

The revised regulations will require female athletes to wear "tight shorts."

Progress is progress, but it is worth noting that the unified men's policy of the Handball Federation only implies that shorts cannot be "too loose". If men can achieve their best athletic performance by wearing uniforms that are not too "loose", why don't women have similar flexibility?

Women and girls face various challenges in participating in sports. One of the challenges is that as girls enter puberty, their rate of withdrawal from sports is significantly higher than that of boys.

Research has shown that, due to the characteristics of overthinking, pleasing and perfectionism, there are astonishing 27-point differences between the self-confidence levels of each sex in adolescence.

Have you ever wondered how many girls give up exercising because of uncomfortable dressing? The number is not zero. It's time to reconsider the uniform standards in sports and the design options that allow women and girls to compete politely and confidently.

Gen Z is subverting our way of movement. As we have seen in the Norwegian team, the next generation of athletes is not afraid to speak up when they see injustice. They know how to use social media as a megaphone and value diversity and inclusion.

This recipe may not be a good combination with traditional sportswear. Traditionally, traditional sportswear is tailor-made for the idealized Western femininity.

In a rapidly changing world, if sports fail to take into account the growing diversity of our society, the evolving social psychology, and the broader cultural reassessment, not only will it lose its credibility, it will also lose its participants.

Sports organizations need to embrace diversity and work with brands to produce sportswear that takes into account various body types, sizes and backgrounds, and provide athletes with the choices they deserve.

Diversity of organizational leadership will help. If your decisions do not reflect diversity, it is difficult to know who you might be marginalizing.

It turns out that when you feel good, you play well, and this is scientifically based. When it comes to our treatment of female sportswear, it may change the rules of the game.

The term "full clothing cognition" was coined by organizational psychologist Hajo Adam and social psychologist Adam Galinsky, and it describes how clothing affects self-perception. The work of Adam and Galinsky captured this phenomenon in a three-part experiment in which participants were shown a white lab coat with different explanations.

At one stage of the experiment, participants wore and believed that they were wearing a doctor's lab coat for a mental agility test, and there were fewer errors than those who wore and believed that they were wearing a painter coat. They also performed better than participants wearing ordinary clothing. The researchers concluded that “the physical experience of wearing a piece of clothing seems a bit special.”

With this in mind, redesigning sportswear for women and girls may have a revolutionary impact on their psychological and behavioral experience. It may affect their sense of belonging, attitude, mood and performance.

Research has repeatedly confirmed that sex is not actually "sold." Talent betrayed. If we do not properly equip women in sports, have we realized all the talents that may exist?

Norwegian handball players pointed out that their bikini bottoms make them feel uncomfortable and objectified. They also made it clear that they fear that uniform regulations will keep young athletes away from their sports.

Researchers Sarah Zipp and Sasha Sutherland emphasized sexist norms in women's sports uniforms and pointed out that uniform design is unlikely to be performance-centric and more likely to cater to "male eyes."

This has the unfortunate consequence of unfairly placing women’s aesthetic appeal above their athletic talents. This superficial approach completely ignores the diversity of body types and cultural nuances. This is also completely arbitrary.

Exercise is very important. They can help girls grow up healthy and confident, and teach a wide range of soft skills, such as determination and professional ethics.

Ernst & Young found that 94% of female executives report that they have participated in sports-which means that girls who participate in sports are more likely to be leading women.

Although the style and fit of sportswear seems to be just a small detail in the broader scheme, what if it is not? Let's let women and girls dress up for the roles they want to play in women's sports. When the old uniform policy becomes an obstacle, don't be afraid to turn a page from the Norwegian team's book: speaking out loud is enough.

Write articles and join a growing community of more than 136,800 scholars and researchers from 4,207 institutions.

Copyright © 2010–2021, The Conversation US, Inc.