Hesketh Fletcher Gym Team

Robbie on 17th November 2022 at 02:56

I absolutely agree with you about lads doing PE bare chest until the mid 1980s at the very earliest, I don't think certainly in boys schools its so uncommon now, it may not be mandatory but I think it's just something lads do. I live near two secondary schools and at all times of the year it's usual to see lads out running without shirts.

I think there may also be a reason why many gyms, I've been a member of 4-5 over time, have in their rules that men must wear shirts in the gym - because many men would prefer not to having grown up that way. When I run outdoors, I usually start in a shirt but it almost always comes off at some stage and returns home tucked in the waistband of my shorts which of course are worn without underpants.

Hi Robbie!

Of course no problem with the question of my place of living. I'm a non UK person.I live in middle-Europe so I don't know much about school life there.
Answering yout question of shirtless PE apart from the UK. I think it was very widespread too till about the 70's. I started my school years in the very beginning of the 90's. Back then shirtless PE (I mean for the whole lesson) wasn't recommended but as you said about people over 40 even over 30 (in the case of myself for example) most of the boys experienced having to remove their shirts many times during their school years. The reason is shirts vs skins as you said. In the 90's it was a very common thing here too. It started to become a rarity during the early 2000's. Primary school here is 8 grades so we go there between the age of 6-14. Back then we had to wear a white vest short gym shorts white socks and plimsolls for PE. As I know it was the case in most of the schools even in the 70's and 80's here. Well it doesn't mean that there weren't any school with a stipped to the waist rule.Maybe I'm wrong but I think having to be stripped to the waist for the whole lesson (not for only team games )lasted later in the UK than here.

Very thoughtful post, Robbie and I agree with the points you made. Doing PE bare-chested is something the majority of British boys would have experienced until the last 25-30 years. I left school in the mid 90s and we were still doing vests v skins then. As you said, I think there's a key difference between making it optional for boys to wear a top and enforcing its removal (sometimes if not always). My class was probably typical in that there were a handful of more confident lads who were quite happy to abandon their tops at any opportunity. Most - and that included me - were a lot more reluctant and wouldn't ever have gone bare-chested in PE given the choice. Like many, I recall feeling nervous the first time I was chosen for the skins team and told to take off my vest. Yet I honestly think being compelled to get used to that in PE did us good in the long run.

Dave, if I may jump in on your questions to Nigel. Are you a non UK person?

Without any doubt early 1980's school PE lessons for British boys in state and probably private education involved very widespread PE done without anything worn on top, shirtless/topless/barechested, whichever word is preferred to describe it. "Strip to the waist" was a common command I heard myself.

I find it hard to believe there is any Brit male who is now 40 plus who went through secondary education without ever doing a reasonable amount of PE lessons without his shirt at some point during school. Literally all of us over that age had to do it like that, whether it was just a handful of times per term, just as skins on a team against tops, or whether it was the routine standard for the lesson like for many.

I read something that suggested this whole aspect is a strongly British thing but I don't believe that for a moment, why should it be? Are we to believe that American, Australian, French, German or other European schools did not go much on shirtless school PE. Why would they be any different. Germans and French are known for a love of clothing loss. Perhaps the truth is that here in the UK we just complain about it more when we did it or afterwards.

I don't think the majority of boys in school were ever greatly enthusiastic about being told they must do PE with a bare chest. Ordering boys to do so is a very different thing to them just doing so with free will together. I think that difference is important.

I suppose when you try to deconstruct this thing with the gift of hindsight you have to work out why this way of doing PE was considered to important in so many schools and that even in schools where shirts or vest tops got worn most of the time they still chose to have the shirts v skins ritual regularly which made sure chests got bared (and backs of course!)

Hi Nigel!

What was the reaction of your classmates having to be half naked inside for every lesson? Was it a topich of speech anytime? How did you play ball games inside everyone having to be shirtless? Did you share any lessons with girls or did they see you having PE anytime?
You've written you went to secondary school in the early 80's. Was shirtless PE still widespread back then in your country or was it a rarity?

Get this.

I went to a comprehensive school during the second half of the 1970s. The newsletter back home to parents said it quite clearly - 'school showers are recommended but optional following P.E class'. But when we got to school every P.E teacher who took us made us take them. It turned out it was they who decided our options, not us. They should have been in politics with wordplay chicanery like that.

During my time at secondary school (mid 6o's) we wore tight white shorts and no underwear which seems generally to have be the normal thing. As a previous person has commented we also did exercises often in in pairs. One was siting on the floor with our feet against the partner (we did wear plimsolls) and then grasping hand and pushing and pulling each other backwards and forwards in a rowing motion. Neve mind what you would see in the changing room or showers, even wearing tight shorts but no other support, every so often you would get a view of part of your partners private anatomy.

You're right Bernard, and Simon.

Same here. Was at school doing gym PE in the early 80's. Our teachers were often waiting for us in the gym rather than hanging around the changing room as we changed. We were not allowed to wear any kind of top in the gym and nothing on our feet either. Close fitting shorts that had to be white was the sum total we showed up to gym in. I knew of some in class who couldn't stand doing PE like that and I don't just mean doing gym without a shirt but without footwear of any kind. Barefoot shyness is quite the thing as well as bare chest shyness but never gets acknowledged for some reason but it's out there.

Even if you're not too bothered by it there is undeniably a strange kind of vulnerability when you are actually made to show up and do something like that where it feels like everyone must be secretly judging you and what you look like and comparing every little thing, and that's before we even talk about heading for the showers with nothing on at all, the full bare naked for the usual predictable willy showing fears and comparing quietly. I still note the shock, if that's the right word, of being instantly and suddenly confronted with a large collection of fellow class penises when we were the new kids starting out showering and wanting to look at everyone whilst trying not to look at anyone simultaneously. In my school gym it wasn't the others in class I was bothered about, it was my teachers who told us to turn out like that. It was them that I always thought were looking on me and others around me very critically and being judgmental about with our still developing and often weedy bodies that were almost an object of contempt I felt. I had one senior PE teacher look me over one lesson and ask me why I had such small feet as if I had any choice in the matter.

We did a lot of physical interactive stuff in gym with each other which wasn't great if you didn't want to be touchy feely with others. Mostly paired up on mats, legs entwined or holding against someone piggy back like. One of the strangest was laying on a mat on your back while your partner pressed his index finger firmly into the belly button while you raised both legs high up and down again. If anyone knows what this was I'm keen to know as I've no idea.

My recollection of the school gym was that it could be quite stuffy in summer and we would drip a lot of sweat very easily but in winter we couldn't work up any sweat however hard we tried as it was so fresh not helped by walking out barefoot onto a very chilly wooden floor. The gym never seemed to have any heating that I remember even though we had to do class completely stripped right down to the bare minimum.

We did a wide variety of things in gym, the obvious and not so obvious. I'm sure I've forgotten half of what we got up to.

When these lessons ended more often than not before we left we'd be told to get straight to the showers and when we had all got in we'd often find one of the teachers standing down one end looking along at the lot of us watching everything and talking to us, often a futile task as the sound of the running water often drowned out what he was saying anyway. You did not get to sweet talk your way out of jumping in the showers after your PE lesson where I went. It sticks with me how quick I got used to the mandated shared showers and after the first one I did I walked away feeling a little bit proud of myself for having got through it without any hassle I'd been thinking might occur in terms of open ridicule knowing how kids can be with each other.

I much preferred getting outdoors doing PE at any time of year, even if it was colder, wetter and muckier. At least we got some decent team games going and actually wore a decent kit for much of the school year although we would randomly remove our tops in summer quite frequently and we'd play hockey skins and shirts as one example.

I left school in summer 1983. Now live and work in Seattle but coming home next year for good.

Simon,
I totally agree that the shorts are far too long, in the 1970s we wore much shorter shorts and no top. When I commented that their kit was sensible I meant that in my opinion it’s better doing gym shirtless.

Simon - when I was at secondary school 30 years after the photo was taken we wore shorts which were tighter and much shorter.. We wore them without tops and without footwear either.

Shorts a bit baggy don't you think John. Enough material there for two pairs. The shorts I wore in gym were much firmer fitting. I also think when boys do gym barechested it makes them work at the tasks harder.

I wish there had been a Gym Team when I was at Senior School in the 1970s I’d love to have been trained to do gymnastics to the standard of these lads. Sensible kit when working hard.

Good to see Mr Dando took the hint and we've had a lot less of his bizarre "campaign".

What precisely is the ongoing purpose of 'Dando' in placing school Phys.Ed kit lists on the various history discussion forums here like this? Surely the point was made long ago and doesn't have any need to keep being reinforced here like this. So why is it? Would you care to give a full answer and properly interact with others as I notice a reluctance to ever do so. What exactly are you trying to prove here?

You didn't like Phys.Ed at school, or taking a shower. That's fine, many share that view. I taught plenty like that during my time. But there is something not quite right and to be frank, downright peculiar about somebody who seeks out school websites for their Phys.Ed rules and cuts and pastes the details on a forum such as this one. You seem to be on some kind of crusade which is serving no purpose whatsoever. Your point has been made, now move on, instead of getting stuck in this same repeating loop that takes the discussion no further forward.

Unless I have missed it amongst many of these history pages, I'd rather know your own personal experience. I'm prepared to give you the benefit of the doubt and not tar you with the 'troll' and disrupter tag like some others have, but if you read this and ignore it and place further Phys.Ed lists from various named schools in future I'll just have to conclude that is what you are. Maybe try and prove that view wrong for once.

Generally speaking there is nothing wrong with being asked to dress appropriately for a Phys.Ed class dependant on what is involved and there is nothing wrong with being asked to clean and freshen up afterwards either. I'd have been more appalled at any school I worked at that didn't provide that opportunity.

Mr Dando, you ask us to join your campaign but leave no contact details, please post them without delay.

I'm sure the police will be interested in the number of school uniform sites you troll looking for details of what children are wearing. Please do get in touch.

Towels might be necessary for showers - life after PE would be a bit uncomfortable if they weren't - but there is nothing said about showers being compulsory!

June, as the Winter period comes to an end it is time we campaigned for the end of the compulsory shower in school. Here is one school that still says a towel is necessary for showers. https://ebhigh.org.uk/Uniform/

Sports Clothing for Physical Education lessons for boys and girls:

Navy blue & white rugby shirt (available from Coes)
Navy blue and white polo shirt (available from Coes)
Navy blue & white shorts (available from Coes)
Navy blue & white “skort” (available from Coes)
Navy blue football socks
White trainer socks (for Summer term)
Non-marking trainers are required for indoor use
Football boots are needed for outdoor use; playing fields and the 3G football
pitch,
A dark coloured tracksuit may be worn for activities in the winter (not compulsory)
(available from Coes)

A towel is necessary for showers.

Students should not be using their school shoes for PE. Fashion sports shoes are not appropriate for PE either.

Join my campaign and support children's rights in the educational system.

Bernard ... well said!

Bernard ... well said!

Again - I hope Admin will allow a digression on 'discipline' & 'hard work'.

Some years back I was digging in the National Archives to find out historical details' of one of 'HM Detention Centres' ('Young Offender Institute', I suppose). I'll not name it.
The place was on the coast - on a warmer summers day almost an idyllic situation, but on a winters day it could be a most cold & windswept place. The lads were engaged on work in the camp complex and on the farm. Most of the farm was on land reclaimed from the sea, by enclosing the salt marshes with high embankments, and using dragline excavators & such. The work was carried out by 'industrial' members of the staff and teams of lads. From my own knowledge of the place, going back over 40 years this would have been hard, back-breaking work, even in the best of conditions.
Now the thing is, boys were picked to work in these teams and work in them was much sought after by them - it was very much a sign that you had 'made it' to be picked - whether or not it finally rehabiliated them, I don't know.
Sorry for the rambling ...

Claire, TimH and William2 - I agree that this site is not as friendly as it used to be. It was once possible to comment without fear of attack from some-one who does not agree with you.
Schools have always varied in many different areas of operation, none more so, perhaps, than in p.e. Kits worn, particularly by boys were often, but not always, somewhat more Spartan in days gone by than in more recent times. That was just the way things were - nothing bad or sinister so suggesting that there was something wrong with a shorts only policy because it might not happen these days is not at all helpful. When I started at grammar school with its shirtless/barefoot regime many homes were still without double-glazing and central heating so perhaps people in general were better able to cope with a little hardship.
There were, no doubt, a certain number of p.e. teachers whose motives were not entirely honourable but they were, I'm sure, a very small minority.
I am guilty of donning my rose-tinted glasses a little when reminiscing about my p.e. lessons as probably others are but I think most contributors here are generally genuine and their posts do not deserve to be attacked in the way that sometimes happens.

I hope Admin will allow a slight divergence ...

Ian mentioned the 1967 'Summer of Love'. For some of us it was the year that we left sixth form. Of a group of four friends, not particularly 'sporty', one guy spent a month as a 'deckie-learner' on a Grimsby trawler, sailing to the Arctic fishing grounds. Another spent the summer working as a 'bin man' to get some money for his first year at UCL. The third - a most unlikely person - went on a pretty extreme outdoor pursuits course, which led to an involvement in outdoor education. Myself - that summer I started an involvement with a leading preserved railway that has lasted 55 years. Now, alas the group is broken.

People say that PE teachers (& others) were sadists & bullies ... well, they gave us four the confidence that summer to leave our 'comfort blankets'.

One thing I believe is that, in the 50s & 60s, National Service was just ending. Many of the teaching staff had 'Served Their Time' and would have seen (& felt) the agonies that the unfit went through on being called up - surely school PE was a way of toughening us up & preparing us for this, if called? (As an aside, in Nazi Germany, before conscription, youths served a year in the Reich Labour Service (RAD) to toughen them up and teach them drill & discipline).

Just out of curiosity, I put the first sentence of the post by Kathleen (5 posts down) into Google. It came up pretty well verbatim, with extensive repetition of the same theme, in the Quora profile of Kathleen Bennett, "writer, author and lover". Still don;t really believe it happened that way

I think it is worth contrasting the 1967 "Summer of Love" with its voluntary nudity with the "Winters of Cross Country" with compulsory showers enforced by my ex-Army PTI teacher - a young man who nevertheless believed in traditional discipline.

Tim H, I do agree with you. These exchanges used to be predominantly individual memories given and taken in good faith. But in the past year or so they have become dominated by people who are in effect campaigning for a point of view and who are intolerant of anyone who differs from them, which makes the discussion rather pointless. Some interesting contributors appear to have drifted away and it is not difficult to see why.

Sadly I have to agree with Claire. The site used to be 'enjoyable' with some light banter but now I see threads where, as it seems to me, people's personal views predominate and dissension is frowned upon. In particular I find statements that PE teachers of ages past (or the majority of them) were cruel sadists, bullies and (so appears) child molesters extremely offensive.
I will say no more ... but I can't really be bothered to follow these pages any more.

Shades of Linda Janson, lately of this parish!

It's not obvious to me why she feels that what went on among the hippies of Haight-Ashbury in the 1970s should be of interest to a discussion of "British History in Pictures".

Sadly, this otherwise admirable site does seem to have become a magnet for the fetishists recently. Is it time for the Owner to start wielding her/his big red pencil and get the discussions back on topic?

I graduated high school in 1972 in a city in California, and nudity was considered a part of everyday life back then. The school I attended was relaxed by the late 60s regarding nudity. The boys swam naked and the girls wore swimsuits until the mid 60s. I'm not sure what led to the girls swimming nude with the boys, but by the time I became a freshman all of the girls in my class were doing it. It seemed like girls could do it if they wanted to. It wasn't something that we had to do. However, if a girl didn't swim nude with the boys she was teased and called names. So all of us stripped in gym class.

In 1967 the Summer of Love event happened in Golden Gate Park and nudity was everywhere. I remember seeing several naked women and a few naked men in 1968. Haight-Ashbury was another area where nudity was common. You could get on a bus and go to Haight-Ashbury completely naked and no one cared. I know I happened to be one of the girls who did it. There were shops at Haight-Ashbury that gave away clothes, furniture, food, and other stuff and it was all free. I saw several naked people walk in and pick out clothes and leave the store naked back to their commune or hippy house.

Tour buses used to tour Haight-Ashbury and there were times the tour guide would say something like “it is commonplace to see naked men and women in this area, if you do not wish to see them, please look away"

I remember times when the streets became clogged with naked dancers and hippies and the motorists would honk their horns. The police were called a few times to clear the streets. They really didnt care about the naked people unlike today.

So nudity was something a LOT of people participated in back in the 60s and 70s. Gym class wasn't the only time and place in which both sexes got naked in front of each other.

Like the three previous posters - plenty of that going on here, too. Also last week, a fair number of youngsters going home after school in sports kit, and numbers of lads from the local junior school training hard to become 'posties' by seeing who becomes the last to go into long trousers.
Last year I wore long trousers on four(?) occasions during BST - rather more this year because of work within the voluntary sector where its rather frowned upon - hopefully a mild winter ahead!

Fiona - good for you - why not indeed. Unfortunately there seem to be some people who think we should go back to the days when body shame ruled and rickets was common.