wellness center

Wellness in the Headlines
(Don's Report to the World)

Boosting the Appeal of Triathlons for Spectators
Monday February 8, 2010

A few years ago, I was a reporter on assignment for a sports magazine. My mission was to observe and describe results, race conditions and other highlights of the famed Muncie Triathlon in Muncie, IN. I can't recall who won, how many participated, what the weather was or other details, but one incident is fresh in mind. A lady was disqualified—for nudity! I'm not making this up. This happens now and then at triathlons around the country. 

As you might expect, athletes are in a hurry in triathlon competitions. They want to transition as quickly as possible from the swim to the bike portions of the race. After exiting the water upon completing the first portion of the race, competitors sprint into a fenced compound where bikes await. This is called the "transition area." Here, as the name suggests, competitors put aside gear no longer needed (i.e., swim goggles, swim cap and bathing suit) in order to dress for success on their bikes (i.e., padded shorts, jersey, sunglasses, bike shoes and helmet). The sensible thing is to remove the swim goggles and cap—and the wet swimsuit.

However, even if not competing in Iran, Saudi Arabia or some other such puritanical country with morality squads lurking about, looking for offenders of demented Sharia dress codes, triathletes in this country can and will be punished for removing wet bathing suits—no matter how quickly or surreptitiously they do so. That is because nudity is verboten. The governing body (USAT) official rule book states, "No nudity in the transition." Furthermore, to prevent women from exposing one or more breasts, the nudity clause contains a further restriction, to wit: "Upper torso must be covered."

Why? Why is nudity of this brief and sensible kind illegal and punished so harshly? It defies logic and common sense, save to severely repressed prudish types or pious Republicans, but I repeat myself. Triathletes do not strip to display themselves to shock or titillate; they do not prance about starkers displaying their goods. Triathletes are time-conscious. There is no temptation to pose for gawkers, in fact, doing so would cost valuable time.

In a few races, separate tents are provided for men and women for changing clothes. But, this is rare. Why not just remove this rule, and allow comfort and rationality to prevail? What's the objection to removing this foolish rule? 

In my opinion, making the change should not be a big deal. On that day long ago (1988) in Muncie, officials did make a big deal of nothing and ruined the day for a nice lady trying her best to have a good race, doing what had to be done. Alas, the forces of repression of vice "exposed" and disqualified her, a shameful injustice. 

There is a simple remedy for preventing such nonsensical actions in the future—massive (but not passive) resistance. If the competitors refuse to be cowed, if they ignore the rule, the foolish prohibition will be gone in a "flash." Done—we'll hear no more of it and never again will a lass or lad be penalized under what seems like some weird religious-based rule. Nobody is harmed by a visual encounter with brief functional nudity. Nobody need choose to be offended. Anyone fearing offense can simply look the other way.

And who would be staring into a transition area, anyway? Was this rule designed to prevent sex offenders, perverts and preachers from attending triathlons to ogle athletes switching from swim to bike gear? Insane—the whole idea of the rule against nudity is mental and should be ignored by athletes, repealed by USAT and forgotten by everyone else. Anyone ever disqualified for this offense should receive a letter of apology from the USAT president and executive director and their race fees should be refunded, with interest. (By the way, in case you're wondering, I never was penalized for this offense—so I do not espouse this position for personal reasons.)

I realize that if you do not engage in the sport of triathlon, the issue of triathlon disqualifications for nudity may not seem as important as finding bin Laden, reducing the deficit, rescuing the economy or convincing gullible middle class and poor Americans that the Republican Party is not out to help them. I focus on this somewhat less consequential matter because it is more within my pay grade of injustices to right—not to mention that it is a topic (unlike bin Laden's whereabouts, for instance) on which I have what might be called "actionable intelligence." That is, it could reasonably be claimed I know what I'm talking about, given my experience with triathlons—and nudity during showers, sleeping and other functions.

However, there are other reasons why broad-minded folks who value personal liberty, including those having no immediate or likely personal benefit, would support the elimination of rules such as the "no transition area nudity" silliness in the obscure sport of triathlon. One is philosophical opposition to Puritan restraints on liberties—on principle. Remember the morality tale about how Nazis came for the Jews, but I wasn't Jewish so did not object—and then they came for another group and another, until finally they came for me—and none remained to help? The liberty of others affects our own. Ingersoll called liberty "the blossom and fruit of justice, the perfume of mercy." He added, "It is a word hated by kings, loathed by popes. It is a word that shatters crowns and altars, and leaves the crowned with subjects and the outstretched hand of superstition without alms. It is the seed and soil, the air and light, the dew and rain of progress, love and joy." Liberty is something we should support and defend in all ways, small and large, whether or not it affects our immediate interests. The concept applies even in this very specific matter—if "they" (authorities) can take little freedoms here and there and somewhere else and do so unopposed, where and when will it end—and how long before something YOU value is taken, as well?

Those who embrace R-E-A-L wellness—a lifestyle that extolls and celebrates reason, exuberance and LIBERTY, must care about this little matter. Other things being the same, REAL wellness seekers prefer choices, cherish the right to do as they wish in all ways, provided that so doing endangers no others, nor jeopardizes public safety nor harms state welfare. Brief nudity in a transition area to rid oneself of a wet bathing suit presents no hazard to anyone, by any stretch of the imagination.

This infamous little rule that victimized a competitor in Muncie is, in my opinion, a bizarre norm appropriate to antiquated customs of an earlier, darker time. Sadly, the Muncie episode is not isolated—and the "law" or rule in this case is modern, not Islamic, fundamentalist Christian or otherwise antediluvian. No, as I have described, this is not the madness of religious zealots. This was not even the consequence of local reactionaries who, indignant at the display of human flesh in public, subjectively picked out an innocent waif as an example to others of the wages of rampant immorality. No, the rule was imposed on its own membership by a governing body, as a precaution against offending intolerant local officialdom.

Of course, I'm not making this suggestion for prurient purposes, not that there is anything wrong with prurient purposes, sensibly channeled. No, the high-minded basis for such a proposal is rooted in a deep-seated conviction that society would be served by the purposeful flaunting of the fit human body. At a time when 64% of American bodies are unsightly (i.e., larded with excess fat), we need more exposure of fit people, such as triathletes. 

Do you share this conviction? This idea might be especially appealing for women, who are penalized more often than men for "nudity" in triathlons because female breasts are judged illegal, at least to display. Men, on the other hand, can go topless for the entire event, and no one thinks anything of it! How can we tolerate such a double standard in this era of full equality? Imagine, if a woman changes from a swimsuit to a dry t-shirt, she can be eliminated from a race! Why? Because she has bigger breasts than a man. Why are feminists not at the barricades about this? Fit (and other) women are a beautiful sight. It is not only unfair to penalize them, it is dysfunctional—we should be encouraging them to display their breasts and other body parts that look wonderful as a consequence of extraordinary conditioning and a superb commitment to personal excellence.

So, wellness promoters everywhere, let's encourage a rule change. Let's organize, promote and/or participate in brief buff triathlon transition area fitness events (BBTTAFE). Won't it be fun to see who shows and what happens? BBTTAFEs might even grow the already fast-growing sport of triathlon, if not the REAL wellness movement. Such a thing might even attract low-lifes who most need to appreciate certain side-benefits of what a wellness lifestyle has to offer.

Of course, if equality for women, freedom from archaic rules, promotion of the wellness movement, greater visibility for triathlons and advancement of tolerance and maybe world peace are not enough, there are also practical, everyday gains for the common man and woman. The nude triathlon transition encourage resistance to other foolish constraints on personal liberties. 

If anyone knows how to reach that lady disqualified in the 1988 Muncie triathlon, please tell her about this cause. She can become the poster girl for the campaign and, with passage, will be treated like a queen when she does her first free transition in a more enlightened era.

Be well, have fun, lighten up whenever possible and always look on the bright side of life.

Note: Earlier versions of this essay appeared here on August 18, 2001 and August 25, 2003. The title of these essays was "Baring One's Soul (and Other Parts) for Fitness."

(Ed. Note: Views expressed in this and other columns are those of the author and not necessarily those of the SeekWellness Editorial Board.)

Add Don Ardell's Wellness Column to your My Yahoo! and iGoogle pages.

Just click the button below and follow the instructions, if any are provided.

A note to webmasters: Other badges generated by Yahoo! Pipes are available for Don's Wellness Column. Don Ardell's Wellness Column is also available as a Google Gadget.