The Independent's journalism is supported by our readers. When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn commission.
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Readers of The Independent have said that the new Manchester United women's kit is 'not sexist', despite outrage from some fans.
The new women's kit drew anger from some quarters for being 'sexist' and 'discriminatory' as the design featured a plunging neckline and differed from the men's version as it lacked a black stripe around the collar.
It is the first United shirt made by Adidas since 1992 after the company outbid American rivals Nike with a mammoth 10-year, £750million deal earlier this year.
Nike, who had made United's kits since 2002, decided not to bid after the Adidas offer dwarfed the previous £23.5m-a-year deal.
But the kit was defended by a number of users on The Independent's Facebook page, with the consensus being that the kit was definitely not 'sexist'.
Here are some of the responses:
Deborah Gregson: The shirt is not remotely 'sexist'. If you've actually seen it on a person it's not remotely low cut. However to be honest I've not bought shirts the last few years because high necklines look horrific on me because of my large chest. A v neck is more flattering on a LOT of women, I have no idea how this is sexist in any way.
Leanne Loveridge: Lower cut on larger chested women is a lot more flattering. I don't see the problem here at all. If you don't like the lower cut wear the men's top.
Dominique Crystal Simone Evans: I'd be more inclined to think it is sexist if they only make men's style tops and expect women to fit into a men's style! Clearly I have a different shape to a man and therefore need a different style! Wtf?
Cassidy R. Scaglione: Ohmahgerd!!!! No black stripes!!! Awful!!! Also, sorry, but a different neckline is not sexist.... Sexist would be if they produced only walking shoes instead of running shoes for women, cause girls aren't as fast as boys... This is just another case of the easily offended "protest addicts" waiting eagerly for the next opportunity for some armchair activism.
Laura Philpot: Football shirts are so unflattering for women about time they sorted it out u might get more women wear them now ...definitely not sexist !!
Claire Louise Sheridan: I am a feminist and I don't find this sexist in the slightest. They're just offering two kinds of neckline. Women can buy either, there's no law against that. The neckline is more flattering for some women's shapes. There's nothing bad about wanting to look a certain way.. if you don't want to look that way, wear the traditional cut. I think it's good it's being inclusive to appeal to more women who might enjoy football but also fashion. No crime in that. To me, it's simply more inclusive.
Jenni Davies: High necks can be a nightmare for women with larger boobs. I don't know any women with larger boobs who choose to wear high necks. Just saying.
And more from Twitter:
Manchester United begin their Premier League campaign against Tottenham. The kit can be found on United's official website.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments