were those cheerleader outfits too revealing? I felt like they were very odd

>>148965289 (OP)
Not really imo. Also why is this a gif?

>>148965297
how come? skirt and short vest, felt eeh

and ask the artist

>>148965289 (OP)
whats odd about it?

>>148965700
it is too revealing and the fact you have to wear it if you're a cheerleader

>>148965289 (OP)
>be young and horny
>see all the skimpy cute cheerleader outfits on shows and movies
>get to high-school
>the cheer program goes out of their way to cover every inch of skin they possibly can
I'm not saying they need to be sent out in bikinis, but did they forget WHY cheerleaders exist? The girls who go for cheerleader want to be seen and desired. The moral boost cheerleaders give players is rooted in making them horny for the girls telling them to win.
Full body sleeves to cover to at least elbows and knees and outfits that obstruct any figure defining curves pretty much render cheerleaders worthless.

>>148965783
no the point of cheerleaders was never to make the players and spectators horny

>>148965289 (OP)
Isnt that their only purpose to be reaviling?

>>148965807
Thy should cheer and inspire them. So they need to be sexy to motivate them.

tummies are the most important for morale

>>148965718
Because you are a faggot

>>148966224
>>148966212
be fr

>>148965297
She moves when your not looking.

>>148965289 (OP)
Animated.

>>148965783
Eh, I was more disappointed the level of fat girls that were cheerleaders.

>>148965783
Neckbeard sausage fingers typed this post

>>148966500
>be fr
What?

>>148966622
aka stop making stuff up

>>148966224
This. Modern standards are so puritan they've lost the plot. It's no wonder they're so staunchly anti-abortion. They're driving lust down so much birth rates would flatline without accidental pregnancies.

>>148965807
Anon if cheerleadering started out with equal values of morality relative to what we see now (in other words overly moderated even by 1880s standards) then cheerleaders would have never lasted. No one gives a fuck about average girls in heavy coverage doing routines sure to be safe and not overly suggestive. It only exists now a something schools have always done. Beyond tradition it's just a drain on school resources because no one in the crowd or on the field is paying them any attention.

>>148966525
I wasn't
I kept hoping to see the chubby ones start rubbing off on the skinny ones

>>148966735
by that logic not a single sport would have survived, because none of them except cheerleading have women dress skimpy. do you really think people in 1880 invented cheerleading just so people can gawk at them during games? in the 1880s?

>>148966761
>1880 cheerleader

This would make a pretty cool cartoon about cheerleader through time secretly saving the world. Similar to the comic book MFKZ that had luchadors evolve from aztec leopard warriors that secretly save the world.

Which I guess would be very similar to Kim Possible except the whole team and probably a little more extreme missions.

>>148966882
off topic as hell

>>148966761
Sports give us both the spirit of rivalry and near violent clashes similar to combat. They're basic primal motivators of human excitement.
Best cheerleaders can do is drum up the crowd's rivalry by singing chants of either self promotion or mocking the "enemy". But the players on the field do a significantly better job of this just by being the ones actually "fighting". Players can further thrill the crowd with showboating antics after captivating plays. All cheerleaders can do is try to capture swells of the crowd when forces beyond their control create those moments and stretch those out or try (and often fail) to keep crowd engagement in the rivalry during downtime like breaks or halftime.
However you give those same cheerleaders cute/hot outfits and let them do routines that are borderline risqué and you give them a whole new tool that will draw in crowd engagement and give them something the players can't do: lust, one of the strongest primal motivators. Furthermore the players themselves will fight harder and play more aggressively if they feel the eye candy at the sidelines smiling at them are going to be impressed by their performance.
Hot cheerleaders make the entire game better sport.

tl;dr sports provide tangible entertainment and modern cheerleading doesn't

>>148966735
>>148966761
>>148966882
Need 1880s cheerleaders NOW

>>148967468
>However you give those same cheerleaders cute/hot outfits and let them do routines that are borderline risqué and you give them a whole new tool that will draw in crowd engagement and give them something the players can't do: lust, one of the strongest primal motivators. Furthermore the players themselves will fight harder and play more aggressively if they feel the eye candy at the sidelines smiling at them are going to be impressed by their performance.
>Hot cheerleaders make the entire game better sport
this doesn't make any sense for a early 20th century conservative audience. they were all about covering women up and keeping them inside, cheerleading for that reason goes against this.

but they wouldn't do it specifically because of this because in most cultures, openly sexualizing women like this is seen as very bad. there's only a few possibilities;

1. the point is to be sexy (doubt, doesn't make sense for the sensibilities of the time and today. it also doesn't even make sense for Kim possibles time, the early 2000s. sure people were neither freaks like a century ago nor prudes like today)
2. a few people at the start wanted it to be sexy, but did it covertly, and everyone else copied them without knowing the true intention
3. it's not meant to be sexual and it's purely coincidental. what's sexual about a knee length skirt and tank top anyway? it's not like they act like strippers in the field, they do visually impressive gymnastics.

>>148965783
Actual cheer never had bare midriffs, that was something the NFL invented for their novelty cheerleading. And unless you're down south, in most of the country playing football from September to December is cold, so yeah long sleeves have always been a thing too.

>>148967685
>that was something the NFL invented for their novelty cheerleading
then it was copied by "actual cheer". that's actually a good theory. people copied the NFL without realizing why the NFL was doing it and accidentally made their cheerleaders too crazy

>>148965289 (OP)
YUMMY TUMMYYYY

>>148965289 (OP)
>too revealing
So long as the girls are attractive enough, there's no such thing.

>>148965718
>it is too revealing

Only if you're a muslim.

>>148965289 (OP)
She belongs to Ron cock

>>148967555
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRsPheErBj8

>>148968744
dehumanizing KING

>>148966658
Thats the truth. Why would they give them those short skirts from the start? Because it motivates the players!

>>148970221
but they're not short. they're to the knee which isn't considered slutty. Kim wears her to the knee. skirts aren't inherently slutty

>>148965289 (OP)

>>148970286
not bad, for ai

>>148965289 (OP)
Sooo...it's a cheerleader thread?

>>148971358
Ye.

>>148970286
GOOD MORNING SIR

>>148971358
adults only or I will kill you

>>148971358
>tube top
>above knee skirt
what were they thinking

>>148972139
sex

>>148971358
And I was just thinking of drawing some cheerleaders

>>148972778
whom

>>148972994
These two

those uniforms are pretty slutty

>>148973103
canonical appearance. are they actually slutty? or am I stupid

>>148972139
>what were they thinking

>>148966212
>Cheerleading while on high heels/platform shoes
Sexy as it might look that's just retarded

>>148967555
>this doesn't make any sense for a early 20th century conservative audience. they were all about covering women up and keeping them inside, cheerleading for that reason goes against this.

I doubt the first cheerleader were in skimpy outfits. This is why I qualified my above statement where if a relative version of modern puritan standards were used in 1880 and thus ultra conservative, then I doubt they'd have ever caught on.
For 1880 if the first cheerleaders were just dressed semi sporty and allowed to chant loudly it would have been eye catching for the time. Hell just putting the women at the sidelines to be in contact with men on the field with no chaperone to oversee them could have been seen as sexually aggressive. If such was the case then relative to our standards that was utilizing feminine charm to make the players horny and try harder. In other words that would have been using girls as tools of lust to inspire.
Cheerleading needs the horny. It's worthless without it.

>>148973103
Sauce?

>>148973626
I wouldn't call it "lust". I could agree cheerleaders were used to inspire teams, but in a non sexual way. you can look at girls and think they're cute without thinking about it sexually. that was probably the intention. more so than literally arousing players

>>148973658
cirenk. that's all I know

there's no school anywhere in the united states that would allow this

>>148973689
Dankë

>>148973809
welcum

>>148971358
I would prefer an Anne thread, myself.

>>148965289 (OP)
but what if they were even more revealing

>>148967711
Like I said, real cheerleaders never had that look. If any did it was a very isolated case and probably a trash school

>>148973672
I'm using lust heavy handedly, but I do still want to imply that sex is tangibly involved. The same way guys will do something stupid on the chance it impresses the girl watching him in hopes he'll get a shot to score with her. He may not have a raging boner but his decisions are influenced by pretty girl's attention. If you're making the cheerleaders less desirable and prohibiting cheer routines that play into arousing the guys on the field then you're losing that angle. It's not strictly lust but it's operating on the same principles.

>>148974452
guess Kim's school is trashy
>>148974472
I guess? I guess the people that had this idea were more so aiming at the romantic approach than anything. "look! these women are fawning for you to succeed! if you win you get a peck on the cheek!"

>>148965289 (OP)
No, exposing the midriff was the style at the time.

>>148974703
something can be popular, in style, normal, and also slutty

Hmm, what if they wore this instead?

>>148965289 (OP)
its nice

>>148974472
maybe, maybe for the players, but definitely not for any spectators

>>148975039
Hyping the players is the main goal, but over time as standards relaxed and they were allowed to make the cheer outfits less reserved the spectators started to get the eye candy too and it lead to more pumped up and screaming crowds.
Not unlike the players if hot girls are standing in front of you asking you to cheer louder the natural impulse to impress them makes for very amped up fans.

>>148965297
>Also why is this a gif?
why not?

>>148974804
kek Kim is mogged hard

>Decided to do a rather shallow Wiki dive on the history of cheerleading
>Apparently it started in the 1870s in American colleges.
Makes sense.
>It was almost exclusively a male activity untill the 1940s
The fuck?

>>148976762
Interesting

>>148970221
>Werewolf has hairy legs.

Please tell me this is canon and not just fanart because I will start watching Monster High

>>148973103
The episode where they go to the camp and are stuck in their uniforms outdoors for the entire episode made me so hard. It's one thing to wear the uniform in a cheerleading context but outside it's just slutty clothing