There's no way to defend disqualifying a champion high school swimmer over a wedgie
Photo by Marcus Ng on Unsplash

I almost couldn't believe this story when I read it this morning. Almost. But when it comes to women's bodies and puritanical pearl-clutching, there's not much that surprises me anymore.

Here's a very brief synopsis of the story as reported in the Washington Post:

A high school swimming champion in Alaska exited the pool after beating her competitors, but instead of being awarded her hard-earned first prize, she was disqualified. Why? Because her swimsuit was riding too far up her butt.

Yes, seriously.


A referee at the swim meet saw more cheek than she could handle, apparently. Nevermind that the girl being disqualified for her swimwear was wearing the same school-issued suit as her teammates. Nevermind that women's bodies come in all shapes and sizes and that some of our derrieres try to devour our clothing every time we move. Nevermind the fact that Speedos contour to every curve of a dude's penis and testicles and no one ever complains.

RELATED: A man told women they shouldn't wear yoga pants. So they threw a yoga pants parade.

As a wide-hipped woman, I take this personally. It took me years—years—to find a brand of underwear that didn't ride up my rear every time I walked. I'm super frugal by nature, but I buy ridiculously expensive panties with thin rubber lines on the cheeks because they're the only ones I've ever found that don't give me a wedgie. (Sorry, TMI but true.)

If I were to swim the length of a swimming pool in any swimsuit that wasn't shorts, you'd be seeing some serious cheek action when I got out. Might as well be wearing a thong. Can't keep my bum covered unless I'm standing perfectly still. That's what wide hips and a big butt do to a girl. C'est la vie.

To disqualify a swimmer because her swimsuit rode up and she didn't immediately fix it upon exiting the water? That's ridiculous. There's just so much wrong with it:

1) Let's just stop sexualizing young female athletes, shall we? Can we all agree to try that for a while?

2) The first thought a swimmer who has just kicked butt in competition should have after exiting the water is, "Yes, I kicked butt!" not "What does my butt look like right now?"

3) If the school issued the suit, and the suit was found to meet the requirements for competition beforehand, the way the suit behaves on a woman's body while she's doing her sport should not disqualify her. Why does this need to be said?

4) Apparently, this swimmer was the only mixed race girl in the competition, and has a "curvier" build than most. Women with African ancestry often have curvier bottoms, and to penalize a woman for that can easily be seen as racism.

5) IT WAS A FLIPPIN' WEDGIE. Wedgies happen. Get over it.

If seeing some cheek really is an issue, why don't they require female swimmers to wear suits that go down onto the thighs like most men wear in the Olympics? Or—and I'm just spitballing here—WHY DON'T WE STOP POLICING WOMEN'S BODIES ALTOGETHER?

RELATED: It's time to stop policing women's clothing and start raising our expectations of men.

The Anchorage School District has issued a statement explaining that the referee's decision is currently being reviewed. According to the statement, the swimmer's coach tried to contest the referee's ruling at the meet and was it was denied.

Honest to goodness, if they don't un-disqualify that girl, someone needs to organize a Freddy Mercury-style fat-bottomed-girls-on-bicycles protest. We don't deserve to be disqualified over wedgies we can't help.

Update: Upon appeal of the referees's ruling, the Alaska School Activities Association has reversed the disqualification and reinstated the swimmer's win in the meet. Good—but still crappy that it happened in the first place.

Canva

As millions of Americans have raced to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, millions of others have held back. Vaccine hesitancy is nothing new, of course, especially with new vaccines, but the information people use to weigh their decisions matters greatly. When choices based on flat-out wrong information can literally kill people, it's vital that we fight disinformation every which way we can.

Researchers at the Center for Countering Digital Hate, a not-for-profit non-governmental organization dedicated to disrupting online hate and misinformation, and the group Anti-Vax Watch performed an analysis of social media posts that included false claims about the COVID-19 vaccines between February 1 and March 16, 2021. Of the disinformation content posted or shared more than 800,000 times, nearly two-thirds could be traced back to just 12 individuals. On Facebook alone, 73% of the false vaccine claims originated from those 12 people.

Dubbed the "Disinformation Dozen," these 12 anti-vaxxers have an outsized influence on social media. According to the CCDH, anti-vaccine accounts have a reach of more than 59 million people. And most of them have been spreading disinformation with impunity.

Keep Reading Show less
Photo by Daniel Schludi on Unsplash
True

The global eradication of smallpox in 1980 is one of international public health's greatest successes. But in 1966, seven years after the World Health Organization announced a plan to rid the world of the disease, smallpox was still widespread. The culprits? A lack of funds, personnel and vaccine supply.

Meanwhile, outbreaks across South America, Africa, and Asia continued, as the highly contagious virus continued to kill three out of every 10 people who caught it, while leaving many survivors disfigured. It took a renewed commitment of resources from wealthy nations to fulfill the promise made in 1959.

Forty-one years later, although we face a different virus, the potential for vast destruction is just as great, and the challenges of funding, personnel and supply are still with us, along with last-mile distribution. Today, while 30% of the U.S. population is fully vaccinated, with numbers rising every day, there is an overwhelming gap between wealthy countries and the rest of the world. It's becoming evident that the impact on the countries getting left behind will eventually boomerang back to affect us all.

Photo by ismail mohamed - SoviLe on Unsplash

The international nonprofit CARE recently released a policy paper that lays out the case for U.S. investment in a worldwide vaccination campaign. Founded 75 years ago, CARE works in over 100 countries and reaches more than 90 million people around the world through multiple humanitarian aid programs. Of note is the organization's worldwide reputation for its unshakeable commitment to the dignity of people; they're known for working hand-in-hand with communities and hold themselves to a high standard of accountability.

"As we enter into our second year of living with COVID-19, it has become painfully clear that the safety of any person depends on the global community's ability to protect every person," says Michelle Nunn, CARE USA's president and CEO. "While wealthy nations have begun inoculating their populations, new devastatingly lethal variants of the virus continue to emerge in countries like India, South Africa and Brazil. If vaccinations don't effectively reach lower-income countries now, the long-term impact of COVID-19 will be catastrophic."

Keep Reading Show less