why i object to lingerie football

Taking a step back from my usual etiquette column, I have come across something that I feel warrants some discussion.

I was watching TV last night when the Australian network I was tuned in to showed an advertisement for an upcoming program which left me quite stunned. An overly excited commentator suddenly shouted out ‘Lingerie Football’ and announced that the hottest new trend in women’s sports is coming to a TV near all of us. All of a sudden female American grid iron players clad in underwear were tackling each other and running across my screen, slamming each other in the mud whilst the camera conveniently focused on this opportunity for a close up. (Yes, breasts do bounce when girls run. Well spotted, camera guy!)

As I said, my initial reaction was actual shock. Like one of those moments when you do a double take and wonder whether you are just having crazy MSG–induced dreams because what you are seeing is so far removed from your own reality. Upon further investigation, I discovered that there is actually a Lingerie Football League, or the ‘LFL’ which features twelve female grid iron teams from the United States being involved in ‘True fantasy football’. According to its website, the LFL was founded in 2009 as an extension of the ‘extremely popular Super Bowl halftime alternative programming phenomenon “The Lingerie Bowl”’.

The LFL now has fifteen franchises throughout North America and is regarded as the fastest growing women’s professional sports league in the United States. Browsing the website, it would appear, to a grid iron novice like me, that the LFL is pretty much the same as the NFL. Each player’s stats are listed and measured by yards made and touchdowns achieved. LFL101 even has an easy breakdown of how the game is scored, what the rules are and how the teams are made up. Yes, exactly like NFL, save for the fact that all the players are running around in their underwear.

Strangely though, this is not commented on in any part of the game description, statistics or rules. I concede that this is probably because the title of the sport gives it away. However I could not help feeling perplexed that the supposed selling point of this sport was not being discussed by those in the league. The fact that these women are playing professional sport in their underwear was presented as an accepted reality, therefore removing the need for discussion of anything outside of the game statistics.

Overt sexuality in sports is not a new thing; predecessors to the LFL include events like ‘foxy boxing’ and female mud-wrestling. What distinguishes those events from the LFL is the claim to legitimacy that the LFL is presenting. The women are professional athletes, many of whom are training with accredited NFL coaches and players. I have no doubt that these women are training just as hard as their male counterparts in the NFL, and have just the same ambition and drive to achieve well on the field. It is just that same old chestnut that keeps it markedly different – the men are not in their underwear.

Now knowing that my initial reaction was not influenced by the consumption of MSG, I have come out the other side without knowing exactly how I feel about this whole concept. I do not for a second judge the players nor do I doubt their autonomy in making such a decision; if you want to play sport in lingerie then by all means, go for it. And high five for finding some lingerie that allows you to not only breathe, but run around and tackle people as well!

I can happily say I like lingerie. I enjoy wearing it, but I also know that it is not for everyone and do not think a woman’s femininity or sexuality is connected to her choice in underwear. (Although I will throw in an etiquette point here and just say that if you are wearing underwear that once were white and are not anymore, then it is probably time to update for hygiene purposes – that goes for men and women.) Despite not being a super sporty person, I also like female sports. So why does the idea of the two combined leave me feeling so uneasy?

I think for me the answer lies in what the LFL is selling. The mission statement of the LFL itself states that it is aimed at ‘blending action, impact and beauty’ in this new form of female sport. This statement implies that traditional female sport (i.e. that in which women keep their clothes on) is distinct from beauty, perpetuating a myth that sport and femininity cannot coexist.

According to the NBC, the LFL is the fastest growing pro sports league in the nation and is being touted as a true ‘rarity in sports – a women’s professional league that’s actually growing.’ This statement may be true if taken on face value, however it also unwittingly highlights the continued struggle for women’s sports to achieve the same media and sponsorship deals that are offered to their male counterparts. The LFL is therefore offering a solution to this struggle in the form of women being overtly sexualised to attract a greater viewership, and more sponsors.

The success of this solution is undeniably tied up in social ideas of women and sport. I accept that if people did not want to watch lingerie football then it would not be so popular. However, I also think that it is a lazy and undeniably sexist marketing strategy. I am pretty sure when the South Sydney Rabbitohs rugby league team were experiencing financial difficulties and lack of sponsorship in the late 1990s, the idea that the athletes play in their underwear was not proffered as a legitimate solution. People would just ask, ‘Why are you running around in your underwear?’

In the end, I think my biggest qualm about the whole idea is that no one seems to be questioning why this is even happening. Why is it that this is an accepted reality for women’s sports but not men’s? Why is the LFL so successful in comparison to traditional female sports? If your reaction to the LFL is that it is ‘amazing’, then be comfortable with someone asking why you think that. Then, if you find yourself uncomfortable with your own answer, perhaps you should reconsider your support.

(Image credit: 1)