In Alaska a few days ago there was a swim meet. The winner was a 17 year old girl who also happened to be the state champion. After the victory, she was disqualified by one of the judges.
What was her egregious rule violation? Did she test positive for drugs? No. Did she leave the starting area too soon and thereby gain an unfair advantage? No. Did she splash water in the face of an opponent? No. Did she reach across her lane and grab the leg of a fellow swimmer, slowing her down? No.
According to the official who nailed her, she was guilty of intergluteal cleft exposure. To be more specific, her butt cheeks were touching each other. AHA.
So, she was wearing an illegal swimsuit which gave here butt cheeks an unfair advantage? Well, no. She was wearing the same swimsuit she had worn before at other meets she had won. One provided by her school. The same one every other girl on the team was wearing.
Before I go on, let me digress.
In 1967 a zoologist name Desmond Morris wrote a book titled “The Naked Ape”. I recall reading it because it had the word “Naked” in the title. Among other things there was a section about the development of sexual attraction in primates. He hypothesized concerning the evolution of human sexual attraction. Morris could not figure out why males are attracted to highly developed mammary glands. (If Jack is reading this, that means: Why guys like big boobs).
After all, the function of mammary glands is to produce milk. Hardly the elixir of love. Hey, baby, can I offer you a grassfed or a 2% low fat?
So, Morris hypothesized (read: imagined) that , like other primates, sexual attraction for men center on the female gluteus maximus (butt). That “rear entry” is the usual form of intercourse for most primates, except those who had been visited by Christian missionaries. So, as Morris further opined the development of large mammaries was an evolutionary adaptation. They mimicked the round ,large gluteal muscles that males find so fascinating. So, women had boobs because they look like butts. OK. Back to our story.
This 17 year old was disqualified for having too much of an intergluteal cleft exposed. There are approximately 7 billion humans on the planet right now, give or take 4 or 5. Every one of them, self included, is endowed with an intergluteal cleft. In my own case I had not seen my intergluteal cleft in years. I forgot it was there. Using mirrors I was able to find it. It was rather disappointing as clefts go.
I am reasonably certain that most 17 year old girls have a better looking cleft than I do. I mean, if I were an Olympic quality swimmer (presuming I could learn to swim) I would have to wear a suit that might show my cleft. Any judge that could keep down his lunch would undoubtedly disqualify me before I hit the pool.
Then again, you have to wonder about a judge (the ONLY judge) who fixates on the intergluteal cleft of a 16 or 17 year old female athlete. Why is the judge obsessed with the derrieres of the competitors? Why is one buttock touching another buttock (of the same person) of such concern as to demand a disqualification? I mean, golf has some crazy rules, but at least how your butt looks does not come into play. Thankfully.
There is a word for a judge who seems obsessed ( see Desmond Morris for details) with a young lady’s butt when he (or she) should be concerned with more important issues. Like rules. The term for such a judge can be found in the obvious place. Look deeply into the intergluteal cleft and you will discover the adequate definition for such a judge. No, look even deeper into the butt crack There is is!
(Addendum: The ruling was overturned. The girl was awarded her victory.)