At first when you look at the question, it sounds strange. Gymnastics of course that's a sport. But with further thought , don't people realize that rhythmic gymnastics key difference between the winners (or medalists) and not winners, are there prettiness or overall look. It's just more of a beauty competition which varies by culture judges opinion and overall view on candidates. It's not much of a sport. Sure there are acrobatic gymnastics movement but so that doesn't mean anything. Why isn't acrobats also a sport. You know like you see when you go to a circus. You see acrobats. Shouldn't that be a sport? can't one be better then another (acrobat). But it's seen more as a visual thing. Also another thing that is a reason for rhythmic gymnastics not being a sport but more of a luxury eye candy show is that only women compete. Come on shouldn't that be clear. If Men where to compete it would be seen as g*y, or ugly. It would be seen as unacceptable, isn't that a clear flag for "not a sport". I know some rhythmic gymnasts might get angry hear but I'm hear to see the varying opinions and see what people think and believe.
Is Rhythmic Gymnastics truly a sport? and should it be in the Olympic games? (please read above and respond).
Should Acrobats like in a circus or even circus people become an Olympic sport because they also gave acrobatic/gymnastic physique because its also athletic?
P.S. I'm not arguing that Rhythmic Gymnastics doesn't require physic or doesn't involve athleticism I'm just saying the overwhelming amount of "artistic" makes it much more of a visual thing then a sport.
That's just my 2 cents
Floors Open
Have A Good Day
Tags: