Just when womens boxing thought it was making progress, it has been dealt a brutal double left jab right cross combo right where it hurts the most – between the legs.

This website ain't called The Punch for nothin'. Pic: The Sun (UK)

Next year female boxing will make its Olympic debut at the London Games, but celebrations and preparations have been soured by a push by the Amateur International Boxing Association (AIBA) to have the competitors wear skirts in the ring.

I kind of thought if there was one sport you didn’t want to piss off then it’d be boxing and the girls aren’t happy.

Apart from being sexist and demeaning, it’s simply not practical to wear skirts in the ring. When you have a pumped up fierce competitor with a deadly right jab breathing down your neck, the last thing you need to be concerned about or diverting your concentration is a flimsy skirt, spraying up and exposing your privates.

These girls have always worn shorts in the ring and it’s never been a problem. Plus, as Irish three-time world champion Katie Taylor said ,“I don’t even wear mini-skirts on a night out, so I definitely won’t be wearing mini-skirts in the ring”.

To add insult to injury the association supported its push for the compulsory skirts claiming they want to make it easier for fans to differentiate between the men and women boxers. I’m sorry, would you like them to wear lacy undies and padded bras as well?

I don’t see organisers trying to put track and field athletes, basketballers, wrestlers, kickboxers and the Chinese swimmers into skirts, so why this? Football codes don’t wear skirts either and the situation does remind you of comments made by FIFA president Sepp Blatter, or to some, “Gaffe” Blatter, when he suggested that female footballers should wear shorter, tighter shorts to increase the popularity of the sport.

Last time I checked, it’s the girls who are the ones putting the trophies in the national sporting cabinet at the moment. Sam Stosur filled it with Australia’s first Grand Slam in a decade. Sally Pearson won every track accolade under the sun including the World Championship and “World Athlete of the Year”.

The Matildas won the Asian Cup – a feat the Socceroos are a long way from achieving, and our women’s Rugby Sevens won the World Cup – let’s not mention the Wallabies efforts in New Zealand this year.

But if you’re shocked to hear that, I’m not surprised, given the only women’s football code handed a decent amount of air time and prize inside backpages in papers at the moment is… lingerie football.

Now I’m not about to burn my bra, shave my head and call off my engagement here, but I have to say I’m pretty disappointed. Yes it is a ratings success and yes the girls are good athletes and more than just models in skimpy underwear, but who’s watching it because of their sporting prowess? And who at the end of the show can tell me which side won? Is that even the purpose of the competition?

Is this, though, what female sports have to do to get media coverage and acknowledgement from the general public? Sadly sometimes I feel this is just the necessary evil evolution female sports have to endure to get a show in sporting minds.

Female sporting history and organisations don’t go back as far as the men’s, so consistent generational change is possibly what is needed for the sports to develop within society like the men’s have, but that won’t happen unless women continue to push boundaries and lingerie football is not the way to do it.

Refusing to give in to AIBA in this instance, however, is one way - although, it would be remiss of me to write this article without acknowledging the ironic twist, that most of us didn’t even know women’s boxing was competing at the Olympics until this skirts issue made international headlines.

Basically no one was confused about whether it was women or men’s fight they were watching in the first place and no one is going to watch these girls just because they now have skirts. It’s not going to attract more fans, people don’t go to the boxing to perve on girls, even if they look like Lauryn Eagle… they go there for the sport, the skill and the athleticism.

The competitors don’t want to be “differentiated” either, they simply want to be known as boxers, as athletes… not as women or girls.

Most commented

78 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • annie j says:

      05:46am | 30/12/11

      Political Correctness rules in the UK Sam the place is ridicoulous

    • scubasteve says:

      05:58am | 30/12/11

      Given the proliferation on You tube of Aussie school girls belting each other up, i am hoping that we have a whole generation of Olympic champions at the ready.
      Call me a misogynist but i find the idea of women hitting each other abhorrent.

    • Sharon says:

      08:01am | 30/12/11

      I find the whole idea of boxing by either gender abhorrent. It is not a sport, it’s a violent barbaric battle.

      Who in their right mind gets enjoyment from bashing the hell out of others? The AMA wants it banned for obvious reasons.

      There are plenty of other sports that involve real skill and exertion without the sole aim being to physically harm and ideally knock out your opponent.

      That boxing continues as a legitimate sport and Olympic event is a shameful sad indictment on our society.

    • L. says:

      09:37am | 30/12/11

      “Who in their right mind gets enjoyment from bashing the hell out of others?”

      Ummm… lots of people.

      Just look at the size of World Title Fight pay per view audiences.

    • centurion48 says:

      10:17am | 30/12/11

      @L.: The people you refer to are the ones who get pleasure out of watching others bash the hell out of another person. They are simply voyeurs. These same people will stand around watching street fighters because of the excitement. That is not the same as being a boxer. I do not support boxing in any form because there is enough medical evidence that it can cause irreversible damage but so do plenty of other sports where the head is insufficiently protected from trauma.

    • L. says:

      11:53am | 30/12/11

      “@L.: The people you refer to are the ones who get pleasure out of watching others bash the hell out of another person. They are simply voyeurs. “

      ...yes, and..??

      The question was “Who in their right mind gets enjoyment from bashing the hell out of others?”. I answered with “plenty” and gave an example of the revenue generated by pay per view to back up my statement.

      Whether these people are voyeurs or not is beside the point. The fact remains that lots and lots and lots of people like to watch fights and brutal contact sports.

    • Jay says:

      08:14pm | 30/12/11

      I find the idea of both men and women hitting each other abhorrent.

    • RobJ says:

      07:05am | 31/12/11

      “It is not a sport, it’s a violent barbaric battle.”

      Why can’t it be both? Of course it’s a sport, it’s a sport where the contenders need to be game, brave and athletic to have a chance of winning.

      “There are plenty of other sports that involve real skill and exertion without the sole aim being to physically harm and ideally knock out your opponent.”

      Whether you like it or not boxing is one of the ultimate athletic pursuits, at test of speed, strength and stamina, you not liking it doesn’t alter the facts! You are not the arbiter of what does or does not constitute a sport.

      Me, I think golf is so boring but I agree that it’s sport and it doesn’t bother me that millions enjoy it.

    • Al says:

      02:55pm | 01/01/12

      L.
      If it was a simple matter of testing the skill and ability of the ‘competitors’ then it could be tested without them beating each other up.
      1) Test the top streghth of their punch.
      2) Test reflex time.
      3) Test maximum number of puches in a specific timeframe.
      etc.
      The thing with boxing is the whole aim is to inflict as much physical damage as you can on your opponent before they do the same to you.
      I call that idiotic.
      There are names for people who enjoy inflicting pain on others, they are called Sadists (or Psychopaths).
      I am sure there is also a name for those who enjoy watching pain being inflicted but it escapes me at the moment.

    • iansand says:

      06:22am | 30/12/11

      I just hope someone is checking their makeup before they get into the ring.

      I think boxing is silly (it is one of the rare “sports” where inflicting bodily injury is the aim of the game, not a side effect), but that rule is ridiculous.

    • Rose says:

      07:42am | 30/12/11

      I’d go past calling boxing silly and call it downright stupid. I fail to see how to people punching the shit out of each other is, in any way, entertaining. I recognize that there is a certain level of skill involved, but I’m sure anyone capable of developing the required skills for boxing would be capable of developing the required skills for some other, less violent sport.
      As for the skirts, it’s a ridiculous ruling. They should wear whatever it is they have always found appropriate for beating the crap out of each other.

    • Markus says:

      04:08pm | 30/12/11

      People’s personal beliefs regarding violence aside, the concept of boxing as a professional sport is definitely a complete joke.
      There are no world rankings, no competitions, no finals, and the way to the top seems to just be beat up as many hobos as you can, then talk smack about the existing champion until he offers to fight you.

    • fox says:

      06:36am | 30/12/11

      The skirts rule is ridiculous!

      But for true equality, shouldn’t genders be eliminated from sports completely? Whether tennis, basketball or boxing, shouldn’t ability trump gender?

      As for women’s sports not getting enough airtime.. if enough people want to watch something on TV, the law of supply and demand will make sure it gets all the airtime it deserves.

    • Direct says:

      08:22am | 30/12/11

      Well true equality would remove genders from sports completely, but when that happens, women cannot compete. Perfect example is tennis. Do you remember the Australian Open in 1998? The Williams sisters said they could beat any man outside the top 200 and up stepped No 203 Karsten Braasch who sounded trounced them. The reason why we have women’s tournaments is because women cannot compete at the highest level with men.

    • Dan says:

      09:56am | 30/12/11

      Something has to be on TV in the first place in order for it to draw ratings…

    • ronny jonny says:

      06:36am | 30/12/11

      I reckon all female sport can be improved by the addition of some skimpy clothing. Take beach volley ball for instance. A ridiculous sport that nobody cares about but it rates it’s pants off. ha ha. Except when the men are playing.
      Female soccer, I’ve tried to watch it but it’s like watching grass grow. Slow, relatively unskilled play, sure it’s a great competion but it’s second rate. Now put em in little tight shorts and I’d be rivetted….

    • nihonin says:

      08:06am | 30/12/11

      I’m refusing to watch female sport until they’re all wearing burqa, it’s too distracting watching them play in some of the uniforms they wear.

    • fox says:

      08:27am | 30/12/11

      I have a sudden urge to watch Top Gun.

    • badrinath says:

      08:29am | 30/12/11

      ronny you fool, you have obviously got limited w-league experience pal. I have been to 4 matches. 1 was ordinary, as happens in any league, and the other three were brilliant. Awesome passing game, higher reliance on skill and passing in the womens game, less focus on sheer speed and physicality.

      A lack of skill is not the problem (I would argue that there is a lack of respect for the way the women play the game) - look how well the Matildas do on the international scene. Or is it you opinion that all womens football is like ‘watching grass grow’? I think you need to develop an open mind that is able to see the action without your prejudiced outlook based on stagnant expectations of the womens game being some mimic of the mens game in the way it is played. The women in the w-league play great football.

    • ronny jonny says:

      09:58am | 30/12/11

      badrinbreath,
      It’s patty cake.

    • Richard says:

      10:43am | 30/12/11

      Lingerie league ftw

    • LJ Dots says:

      03:18pm | 30/12/11

      @nihonin, thanks for the laugh, I can’t wait to see the promos’ on Foxtel.

      World Burqa Sportz (WBS) - sign up now and miss what you’re seeing.

    • James Macgregor says:

      06:38am | 30/12/11

      I’m a Scotsman. I enjoy wearing my kilt. I find the Sassenach convention of wearing trousers demeaning, but I don’t find it sexist. Females wearing trousers, now that usually IS sexist.

    • KH says:

      06:48am | 30/12/11

      You didn’t mention the demeaning “uniform” rules for women in beach volleyball either - but skirts in a boxing ring? Only a man could come up with that. That is the most ridiculous thing I have heard today….. Oh wait, the panda article…....

    • PsychoHyena says:

      01:31pm | 01/01/12

      @KH… Didn’t think there was much of a difference in the rules for men or women in Beach Volleyball, except those that make sense.

      Wikipedia: Beach Volleyball - Uniform Controversy: “According to FIVB rules, female beach volleyball players have the option of playing in a one-piece uniform: “A player’s equipment consists of shorts or a bathing suit. A jersey or “tank-top” is optional except when specified in Tournament Regulations. Players may wear a hat”, but most prefer the two-piece bikini.”

      So where is the hypocrisy? Regardless of the situation women are always allowed to cover their chest, men are not.

    • Bill says:

      07:00am | 30/12/11

      Netballers wear skirts without a problem.

    • Mayday says:

      08:13am | 30/12/11

      They also get a run on the telly…....perhaps its to do with the skirts?

    • I, Claudica says:

      08:16am | 30/12/11

      Netballers aren’t fighters. You can’t be, either, if you’re making this comparison.

    • Zed says:

      10:13am | 30/12/11

      I, Claudica,

      You obviously don’t know much about fighting.

    • netty says:

      11:25am | 30/12/11

      Yes, however it is traditional that skirts are worn, and the newer designs are so it gives as much freedom of movement as possible (as there as some wierd jumps and movements we need to make haha). They are also extremely lightweight to assist with speed, there is alot more jumping and need to sprint then in boxing. But mainly, i think it is tradition, and its one that no one really has an issue with because there are benefits to the tradition.

    • Steve_85 says:

      07:20am | 30/12/11

      Sure it’s fun to WATCH women’s sports, but I’d be willing to bet that it’s mostly MEN watching it, and it has nothing to do with the SPORT and everything to do with watching the WOMEN.

      As for women being good athletes? I’m still waiting for the punchline here. That’s got to be about the worst kind of JOKE I’ve ever heard.

      Women’s 800m world record: 1:53.28
      Men’s 800m world record: 1:41.01
      Men’s JUNIOR record: 1:42.69 (even the kiddies are faster than the best woman in the world)
      Difference?  Men are 11% faster. Men have to beet the women’s WR just to qualify for trials.

      In the only category that actually matches body weight (69kgs)
      Women’s then Men’s records:
      Snatch: 128 - 165kgs (23% in favour of men)
      Clean and Jerk: 158 - 197kgs (20% in favour of men)
      Total: 286 - 378kgs (25% in favour of men)

      Discuss and shotput can’t really be compared because they use different weights. However both the men and women threw them about the same distances… but the men’s weights were 50% heavier. Javelin, men’s javs are 25% heavier and they threw them 25% further.

      In every event available that measures speed or strength, the men come out ahead. Women are good athletes? Give me a break, they’re lucky that they are allowed to compete at all.

    • Fiona says:

      08:19am | 30/12/11

      Lovely. What would you have women do then steve85 stand on the sidelines again? Despite their slower speeds etc, I’d hazard a guess that elite athletes (females) could still kick the average males butt.

    • I, Claudia says:

      08:21am | 30/12/11

      GASP. You mean men are actually stronger and faster than women? HOLY CRAP. Someone had better give you a Nobel Prize, because I NEVER would’ve guessed that! I’m an athlete who enjoys watching both men and women playing sport and - wait for it; here comes another mind-freak - I’m also a woman. After years training in Martial Arts, I would actually love to fight a man. I would appreciate the challenge. However, most men don’t want to fight women, and not unreasonably, given the fact that they don’t have anything to gain from it. If they win, they’ll have “just beaten up a girl” and if they lose, they’ll “have been beaten up by a girl.” The hysterical paranoia of men is actually debilitating to both genders.

    • Peter says:

      09:06am | 30/12/11

      Does anyone recall the name of the man who came last in the 400 metre final at the Sydney Olympics? No? Well he finished the race nearly 4 seconds faster than superstar Cathy Freeman.
      For the record his name was Danny McFarlane from Jamaica with a time of 45.55. Cathy’s finished in 49.11.

    • Steve_85 says:

      10:10am | 30/12/11

      @ Fiona
      No, I’m quite happy with women playing sports. I just don’t think we should be holding them up as athletes when the best woman in the world wouldn’t even qualify for most events if they weren’t woman only. Some disabled men run faster than the world record holding women. Think about that.

      Ofcourse elite female athletes could kick the ‘average’ male’s but. The ‘average’ western male would probably die of a heart attack while they were trying to compete. Having said that, most countrys’ womens’ teams would be beaten by the male high school teams.

      @Claudia
      My point is that the women are so far behind the men in most (all?) sporting events that it simply isn’t worth watching the women for the sport. If we simply combined all our segregated sports teams into one team, I doubt many women would get to play at all. The teams would be entirely male. Well, right up until the quotas were introduced anyway.

      @Peter
      Funny how we celebrate mediocrity isn’t it?

    • Direct says:

      10:12am | 30/12/11

      Claudia seems to think that women, being paragons of virtue, wouldn’t mock men for losing to a woman, when in every instance I’ve witnessed, it’s women leading the cat-calls and jeering.

    • Zed says:

      10:15am | 30/12/11

      I, Claudia

      I realise women like to shriek uncontrollably and for no logical reason, but Steve was addressing the author’s lofty claims that women are filling the trophy cabinet at the moment.

    • Deadpool says:

      10:59am | 30/12/11

      That has got to be one of the stupidest comments I have ever read.

      As a male sprinter thats the same age as you Steve, I can run sub 50 second 400’s and fairly quick 200’s. But put me in anything further and its a joke. If I was to participate in an 800 against half decent female middle distance runners, I’d get my arse handed to me in a high hat. I just dont have the stamina.

      Comparing males to females in sport in the same events and in such an offensive way is just plain stupid and ignorant not to mention the fact it clearly points toward an underlying resentment you have toward woman. What happened? Did all the girls beat you in PE at school?

      How about you come out to the track one evening and compete in the top female field of any event you like? I reckon even the female “kiddies” would leave you for dead.

    • Julie says:

      11:41am | 30/12/11

      Steve, I don’t think anyone is debating the fact that men are by nature more naturally endowed athletes by way of strength, endurance and stamina. And what’s the point in comparing men’s world record times to women? We, ah, all know men are faster. Sorry if you thought you were dropping a earth-shattering bombshell with that one. The point of sport and competition is self-transcendance, and pushing through limitiations. to be the best in your field - women in their field, men in theirs. By your train of thought children shouldn’t be encouraged to play sport, because damn, they are so slow and uncoordinated, and ultimately the worst competitiors around. Men are by far superior athletes! Why would you even bother watching kids? Call off nation-wide children’sporting events everywhere, they’re just like watching grass grow because, thankfully as Steve has pointed out to us, MEN ARE STONGER AND FASTER!!!!  Sounds to me like you’re the least qualified person on this forum to be commenting about sport, as you clearly haven’t grasped the purpose of it yourself. Do you know men are stronger than BABIES??!!!

    • Jen says:

      08:21pm | 30/12/11

      Great comment Julie. Personally, I prefer to watch females play sport. I can relate to it and am inspired by it much more, being a female myself.

    • AAAdam says:

      08:54am | 31/12/11

      “I would actually love to fight a man. I would appreciate the challenge. However, most men don’t want to fight women”

      Sign up to the infantry. You can fight all the men you like on a real battlefield. Don’t worry, the enemy won’t go easy on you because you are a girl. I’m sure you’ll appreciate the challenge. Unless of course you have some excuse?

    • Andrew says:

      12:35pm | 31/12/11

      Why dont you join up first adam, or have you got some excuse. Seriously because shes keen to fight a male in martial arts, you think that equates to wanting to join the army and fight on a battlefield.

    • PsychoHyena says:

      10:08am | 03/01/12

      I, Claudia, there is a little issue of that should a male challenge a female in the ring you will have MTR and her following all over the male telling them what a chauvinist they are and how they need to fight women to feel good.

      Blame your own gender not mine, they set the rules not us.

    • Brenda says:

      07:41am | 30/12/11

      I don’t enjoy women’s sports, especially tennis where girls are patronised with the same pay cheque as boys - for playing less sets.  Pathetic.

      What an ugly sight - women belting women. Even worse than men belting men.  Another story about women who think they can be men, how puerile.

    • Steve_85 says:

      08:15am | 30/12/11

      Women are patronised by being given equal pay for less work? I believe they were DEMANDING just that. Funny how we still hear about the ‘wage gap’ almost every other day though.

    • redvixen says:

      08:16am | 30/12/11

      Tennis is, by far, my favourite sport.  And I think that the women’s competition has become quite strong over the last decade.  However, women should *not* be paid the same as men in the Grand Slam events until they are expected to play the same number of sets to complete a game.  Equal pay for equal work.

    • Kleia says:

      08:23am | 30/12/11

      Congratulations on missing a shockingly obvious point. That must’ve taken a real, concerted effort at denial.

    • Joan Bennett says:

      07:54am | 30/12/11

      Any bloke who reckons women should have to wear skirts for anything should be forced to wear a skirt for 12 months so they know how annoying and impractical they are.  Unless of course they already know and they are trying to force women to wear them because they hate women.  Get your sexuality worked out guys, for goodness sakes.  And all the comments about wanting to see women in skimpy clothes are a sign of unresolved issues about this very thing.  If you have to try and prove to yourself constantly that you are straight, well…  If a bloke genuinely likes and is attracted to women, he doesn’t want to demean or objectify them in any way.  It’s just logical.

    • mick says:

      08:26am | 30/12/11

      Men wore skirts in ancient Rome from all accounts.

      You remind me of Germaine Greer Joan Bennett.  Greer is responsible for the emancipation of women many of whom are now desperately unhappy because they got what they wanted.  Tells a story.

      You live in denial.  Women WANT to wear “skimpy cloths” as this attracts men.  Guess who spends obscene amounts of money on clothing…..not fellas.

    • Direct says:

      08:59am | 30/12/11

      Yeah, get your sexuality worked out guys! If you’re attracted to women why would you want to see them in skimpy clothes? Only gay men want to see women in skimpy clothes!

    • Bonestar says:

      09:18am | 30/12/11

      So what your saying is any guy who wants too see female athletes in skimpy clothes must be a queer? Wake up to yourself.

    • RobJ says:

      08:07am | 31/12/11

      “how annoying and impractical they are. “

      Hmmm, when I’m in the office on a hot day wearing trousers I think to myself (sometimes) I bet a skirt would be more practical and comfortable.

      “Yeah, get your sexuality worked out guys! If you’re attracted to women why would you want to see them in skimpy clothes? Only gay men want to see women in skimpy clothes!”

      Well bugger me, I never realised I was gay.

    • Rossco says:

      08:46am | 30/12/11

      Sam, get over yourself. You know that womens sports by and large hardly ever reach the degree of athleticism that is shown in mens sports. Simply put, it is boring to watch about 80% of womens competitions compared to mens.

      “The Matildas won the Asian Cup – a feat the Socceroos are a long way from achieving, and our women’s Rugby Sevens won the World Cup – let’s not mention the Wallabies efforts in New Zealand this year.”

      Who gives a shit Sam? These competitions are a shadow of the mens competitions. Sure it’s awesome that they achieved something and good on em for having the courage and determination to excel in their sport, but the Matildas could be beaten by an under 15 boys side for Christs sake.

      The Matildas could win the world cup and Im sure we’d hear Melissa Doyle harp on about it for a week, saying “Here’s the team that achieved it before the Socceroos” but this country will not be happy about soccer until the Socceroos win the world cup.

      Why does this argument have to come down to a pissing contest between the men and the women sports though? Since when have the men in these teams or competitions ever held back women athletes from achieving their glory? Why rub it in their faces, they dont come up with crap like the skirt rule.

      Your whole article screams of typical entitled feminist whinging.

    • Sam says:

      07:30pm | 30/12/11

      Oh dear Rossco, sadly comments like yours are what made me write the article in the first place.

      This article wasn’t about men v womens sport at all and to suggest so obviously shows an underlying sexist demeanour – ouch I don’t think you realise it yet either.

      Women don’t want to compete in the same category as men, that’s not what they aim for, nor should it be, they simply want to be the best at their sport, to strive to achieve at the highest level possible, world domination if you like. And they want to be fairly recognised and acknowledged for doing so as well.

      By writing Matildas v Socceroos it wasn’t to say, the girls can beat the boys, it was to give a scale on how great an achievement that was. It’s a big event in both women and men’s sports, the Socceroos haven’t achieved it yet to give you an idea about how big it is, but the girls did and sadly not many realise that.

      I’m not calling on people to compare men’s and women’s sports as though they are playing for opposing teams.  But to acknowledge what these female teams have achieved on their own merits in their own field.

      As for women’s sport being boring…really? Now that’s sad…did you not watch Sam Stosur’s US Open final with Serena Williams, the Matildas thrilling penalty shoot out to win the Asian Cup?

      Our girls produce some amazing memorable sporting moments, that will forever stay in sporting fokelore

      Womens sport doesn’t have to be made sexy with skirts or lingerie, it’s exciting and thrilling as it is.

      I suggest Rossco you take a deep breath and watch a few of the chicks in action…don’t look on them like “they could never beat the men” or “they’re not as good as the men”…they’re not competing against them and don’t want to either, just enjoy it Rossco, without the tude too.

      But thanks for the comment “typical entitled feminist whinging” - that was a compliment, I loved that!

    • AAAdam says:

      08:39am | 31/12/11

      “Women don’t want to compete in the same category as men, that’s not what they aim for, nor should it be”

      Now lets see if that logic follows through to allowing women to serve on the front line. It far more demanding than sport, with far more dire consequences for losing. Are you still there Sam? A penny your thoughts.

    • Jane2 says:

      09:30am | 30/12/11

      I fully understand the comments by the boxers about skirts.

      At my highschool we had the choice of netball skirts or trackies. I wore trackies even on 40C days as I wasnt comfortable showing my undies to the boys.

      Skirts are not practical for most sports which is why they have been phased out. Trying to introduce them to boxing is an attempt to increase viewing audiences only.

    • stephen says:

      10:27am | 30/12/11

      And the only sport where Larry Emdur commentates from the front row.

    • Kung_Fu Kimba says:

      09:59am | 30/12/11

      Call me crazy, but maybe they could have the choice of wearing a skirt or shorts. It is an individual sport is it not?

    • Khrystene says:

      10:02am | 30/12/11

      It’s not bloody jelly wrestling guys!

    • Sam says:

      06:44pm | 30/12/11

      You’ll notice the article refers to the fact Aiba is “pushing” for women to wear skirts in the ring at the Olympics, it is set to be discussed and a final decision will be made in January.
      They are pushing hard, at the World Championships last year, the girls arrived to find the uniforms waiting for them were skirts not shorts.

    • Gratuitous Adviser says:

      11:52am | 30/12/11

      Olympic sport, yuk.  The Association Internationale de Boxe Amateur (AIBA) represents olympic boxers, but does not rank the woman, at all.  Not that I could find, anyway. 
      When there are any woman boxers , dress or no dress, that can stay above the poverty line in any other job and do not have a 20% discount with the local tattoo parlour, then I might follow the sport.  You know, never.
      By the by:  I have the same opinion for the blokes

    • BJ says:

      12:47pm | 30/12/11

      Seems to me to be a pretty stupid ruling particularly as it achieves nothing and they should have foreseen this controversy. I cannot think of too many other Olympic sports that require competitors to wear skirts, netball aside. That being said, I cannot see that boxing in a skirt would be detrimental- you cannot grab or tackle (or even punch below the waist if I know the rules) so it’s much less an issue as it would be in a game such as Union. The competitors will most likely wear “skins” underneath anyway, or at least should just to shove it to the uniform ruling.

      Men’s sport vs Women’s sport? It’s a silly debate and but unfortunately one which will be going until the end of time. Full credit to the Australian womens teams in rugby and football, and I think that shows Australia has always supported women in sport, probably better than most other countries (the WNBL was started well before the WNBA in the U.S.A.  basketball’s homeland). Comparing the women’s and men’s football and rugby world cups however is foolish- less teams play internationally in both sports, and the men have been playing so much longer than the women in both that they have had time to build to a higher level of skills/physicality.

      I personally think women in sport is great, my wife plays club soccer (in shorts!), has always had 100% support from me and I enjoy watching games. She’s pretty handy but could she compete with the men? I doubt it, but that has more to do with evolution/God or that fact most of the men have been kicking a ball around since they were 3y.o. not effort on her behalf.

    • holden says:

      01:30pm | 30/12/11

      I would like to see a male/female boxing match, with a purse of $10,000, winner take all.
      I nominate Erich to represent the “men” of Australia, and let the Women’s Boxing Association nominate their champion.
      If he wins, Erich could buy another two tonne of tissues, and if he lost he would agree that the girls are too good for him and that he would retire, annihilated, never to be heard from again.
      Oh yes. They both have to wear skirts. And the fight must be to a decision. No drawers. I mean, no draws. That is,
      er, umm, well maybe ‘no drawers’ might be a good idea.

    • Dan Webster says:

      01:36pm | 30/12/11

      FACT - Men perve, it’s just how we are and we are good at it. How would we notice the girl of our dreams if we didn’t.

      FACT - Women perve, they just don’t admit it (to men anyway).

      Would women watch Rugby League if the men wore short skirts and flashed their undies ? . . . . .
      (Okay, Maybe for a laugh they would!)

    • scumbag says:

      05:33pm | 30/12/11

      Mrs Bag, a woman of great character, poise, breeding and culture, mostly abwhores women and men boxing, including each other, and each other succesively. I had no idea of her displeasure at women boxing in skirts, let alone men doing the same, and therefore my skirt has been confiscated, after only one mixed training session at the CWA hall on Tuesday.

    • Gee Jay says:

      02:50pm | 30/12/11

      What is boxing about?  It is about 2 people trying to bash each other senseless!  That it is allowed to continue, and is a legal sport is quite sickening !!  Why women would wish to take part in such a brutal [ sport ] sic. is unbelievable…

    • Bonestar says:

      04:58pm | 30/12/11

      It’s only unbelievable to someone like yourself who obviously wouldn’t have the courage to step in the ring or the skills required to do so. No one is forced to take part if you think it’s brutal that’s your problem.

    • Robert Smissen of Rural SA says:

      05:19pm | 30/12/11

      This decision is on a par with the sad gits who banned Dawn Fraser for TEN YEARS! !

    • MK says:

      06:25pm | 30/12/11

      Regarding the LFL
      “Is this, though, what female sports have to do to get media coverage and acknowledgement from the general public? “
      Well.. Yes
      if it were purley down to Athletic ability/perfomance
      the Best Female Footballers would Get Destroyed by Division II Highschool teams
      who would get destroyed by Dvision 1 Higschool
      who would get destryoed by destroyed by Dvision II college
      Who would get destroyed by Divsion 1 College
      who would be ground into a fine paste by the NFL

      At least LFL is honest enough to realise they can’t copete athletically
      And need to innovate
      They borrow a lot form the Area Fottball Leauge, who made up for lower athletic talent with various innnovations

    • marley says:

      08:44am | 31/12/11

      So what you’re saying is, nobody except NFL players should play football at all, ever, because the non-NFL’ers are always going to be beaten by someone. 

      Sport is about playing a game, running a race, fighting a fight to the best of your ability, and testing yourself against your peers.  I wouldn’t expect a kid playing minor league hockey to have the skills of an NHL player, or the local Aussie rules team to be of the calibre of the AFL, but that doesn’t mean minor league hockey or bush footy aren’t fast and exciting games, or that the kids aren’t “athletes.”  And it doesn’t mean it’s not worth going to see them play.

      Same with women’s sports.  They may not reach the lofty heights of elite men’s sports - but it doesn’t mean the women aren’t athletes playing to the best of their athletic ability or that their games aren’t exciting.  And winning world championships in any sport, whether you’re male or female, is something to be respected. 

      And funnily enough, your own argument supports my point.  As you say yourself, the Div 1 college teams would get ground to a paste by the NFL - yet college football in the US makes millions from TV coverage.  And they don’t resort to gimmicks to do so.  People enjoying watching contests, even if they’re not at the very top level, and they enjoy supporting their teams, even if they’re not in the NHL or the EPL or the NFL.

    • Julia says:

      04:20pm | 31/12/11

      Wow! We thought that sort of sexism had gone by the wayside. At Teacher’s College in 1961-62 Miss Somerville tried to insist on female students wearing skirts on trampolines (dangerous) and almost had the vapours if any male student appeared bare chested after footy.  What year did you say we were entering - or are all the powers that be of a similar vintage to Miss Somerville?

    • Ridge says:

      01:22pm | 01/01/12

      Sam, the ugly truth is that the ultimate value of a female (athlete or not) is her looks.

    • Al says:

      03:10pm | 01/01/12

      Lets see:
      Boxing outside a boxing ring = assault.
      Sure the same applies to some other sports (like many martial arts competitions), but most sports don’t require a person to try and physicaly damage the other.
      Those are the facts, but most ‘fans’ claim it is just harmless fun and don’t want to be told different despite the evidence regarding long term brain damage from participating in such sports even with protective gear in place.

    • Ben H says:

      03:02pm | 02/01/12

      The girls would be happier if they were trained in a more passive, graceful role, rather than one that instills unnatural agression and competitiveness. I’m not a fan of boxing in general, but find the concept of ‘ladies’ belting the senses out of one another downright sickening.

    • Bora says:

      05:23pm | 02/01/12

      Love how people are using the comments to show sexism and misogyny, when men vs. women or even general commentary on women’s sport is completely not the point of the article and has nothing whatsoever to do with it. Forcing women to wear skirts in boxing is nothing but sexist. There doesn’t need to be a difference in the uniform. The skirts serve no benefit, are are nothing but impractical. Not only is it offensive to women, but you men should be offended too. The reason for the introduction of skirts is presumably to increase audience numbers. They assume that you’d want to watch women’s boxing more (or only) if they were in skirts so you could perve on them basically. They are lowering your intelligence and making you out to be baffoons. Both sexes should be offended by women being forced to wear skirts in boxing. I mean, boxing. Are they trying to be funny? Great article btw smile

    • UGG says:

      04:17pm | 15/11/12

      There is an interesting film on Channel one.He suggested a picnic.I owe you for my dinner.His vanity was hurt by their talking so frankly.Let’s watch TV with a candle on.I’d like to look at some sweaters.I’d like to look at some sweaters.Never mind.Don’t fall for it!As you know, I am a very kind person.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

David Penberthy

@KevCorduroy @SallyHitchiner it's a great idea I doubt he'd go for it though far too laid back

ToryShepherd

. @mcguiremi is journo of the year! #samediaawards

ToryShepherd

.@mariamosco @msmarto Super Smarto. And Shirley Stott Despoja into the Hall of Fame #samediaawards

ToryShepherd

Best print journo to @mcguiremi woot! #samediaawards

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter