Dance was a huge part of my life growing up. As both a studio dancer and a member of my high school's competitive pom squad, it's safe to say that if my parents, friends, or teachers didn't know where I was, they'd assume it was a dance studio. I was — and still am — most at ease on a black marley or hardwood floor surrounded by mirrors and music. Dance was my escape. With each eight-count and turn combination, it gave me the ability to stretch the boundaries of who I was and even become someone else for a brief time.

One of my favorite parts of dance was the ritual of it all — the synchronization and repetition. Whether it was 21 of us moving in sync through a jazz routine, doing the same stretches together in time to our favorite warmup playlist, or sitting lined up in front of the studio mirrors doing our hair and makeup before a performance, I lived for those moments of routine within my otherwise hectic life. I had a special place in my heart for my false eyelashes and teased hair (and still do!), and I'll never forget the bliss that was to get fitted for a new uniform or costume. Wearing my gameday uniform for football games and stepping onto the football field under the stadium lights existed on an entirely other level.

A few weeks ago, I stumbled upon this article on espnW. In it, the writer heavily criticizes the suggested dance and cheer tryout attire, as set forth by the University of Washington. As a former dancer and member of a dedicated spirit program, it upsets me that someone with no apparent connection or understanding of dance or cheer has taken it upon themselves to tear apart not just the suggested attire for a collegiate cheer and dance tryout, but the sports/activities/whatever themselves. For a writer to take the component of recommended tryout attire and use it as the focus of an entire article rather than even mentioning the technical requirements of said tryout simply perpetuates the "problem" discussed in said article.

Before I get torn apart for what I'm about to say, let me preface this by saying that I respect Tory Barron as a young sportswriter, female or not. I have read some of her other pieces on espnW and enjoyed them, particularly a little piece published the same day about "raising awareness of online bullying of women in sports.

Oh, the irony.

Tory Barron — a woman — writes, "For a sport that has been fighting to be taken seriously for such a long time, this is simply disheartening. It sends the overt message that appearance is the most important thing, if not the only thing that matters." Who is to say that appearance and technical ability and athleticism are mutually exclusive? Appearance in dance is not the most important thing, but presentation very well may be. A dancer or a cheerleader is not just an athlete, but a performer as well. As much as triple pirouettes and flexibility and sky-high leaps are a part of dancing at a high level, so is the aesthetic and look maintained by the dancers. They are often representatives of their school and athletic department. While the football players and basketball players are on the field or the court, they are often in the stands or on the sidelines interacting with fans and visitors and contributing to the overall atmosphere of the athletic event. So yes, I'm going to go ahead and say that just like my insanely talented basketball player of a sister has certain shoes she wears with certain uniforms (because "swag" or something) and intricately braids her teammates' and her own hair before each game, the teased hair and the false eyelashes typical of a dance team are very much a part of the uniform and the overall aesthetic of the team.

Which brings me to my next point, Barron's criticism of the recommended tryout attire–a black sports bra and spandex shorts. For anyone who has ever danced, this is standard attire, right along with a leotard and tights in a ballet class. There are reasons behind this, first and foremost being that the form-fitting attire allows a coach to see the dancer's lines and technique without being obstructed by a baggy t-shirt or pair of sweatpants. So much of what separates a good dancer from a mediocre one lies in minute details — a turned out foot, a closed ribcage, a fully extended leg — that can only be truly seen and critiqued when a dancer isn't hiding behind layers of clothing. I remember having to explain this to my father, a basketball coach, when I started dancing at a more serious, advanced level.

In the setting of a tryout or practice, it's not about sexuality or objectification, it's about the dancer being able to perform at the highest level and the coach being able to make the necessary corrections to further improve technique and prevent the injury that can come from the use of improper technique. In the case of a tryout such as this one, it allows the focus to be on the dancer's performance and technique rather than her clothing. The same goes for using this attire in performances — those costumes are often just brighter, sparklier versions of a dancer's practice attire. In a game or competition setting, dancers and cheerleaders–like all other athletes with their own uniforms and cool shoes — dress to impress, while still wearing the expected attire for their respective sports. At the end of the day, it is a uniform, designed to identify the members of a team.

I'll add to this that I've never heard anyone complaining about the spandex shorts worn by female volleyball players (often identical to those worn by dancers — trust me, I had just as many or more pairs of the Nike Pros my friends on the volleyball team were wearing) or the short skirts favored by women's lacrosse teams (Barron played on the UConn women's lacrosse team). Why is it that these items are only seen as bad when accompanied by rhinestones, bows, and pom poms?

Furthermore, as a woman in general, when did it become a bad thing to take pride in your appearance? When did doing your hair and putting on makeup and nice clothes begin to simultaneously delegitimize us as people or, in this case, athletes? I think the biggest problem I have with this article is that it makes it seem as though we as women have to choose between looking good and excelling in our chosen fields. I'll be honest, for myself and the majority of young women around me, we do our hair and makeup and dress a certain way not for anyone else, but because it makes us feel good about ourselves.

When I was still dancing, I used to make sure my hair and makeup even looked good for practice, for the sole reason that I knew I couldn't stand in front of a mirror for such extended periods of time without liking how I looked. For me, doing my hair and makeup and taking pride in my appearance makes me feel more confident and professional. I understand that not everyone feels this way, and that's perfectly fine. But I'm certainly not about to cut them down for choosing to look a certain way. For Ms. Barron to imply that just because the UW Spirit Program as an organization, along with its members, takes pride in appearance and presentation makes them less competent, less athletic, and less empowered comes off as silly.

It's only a problem because you're making it a problem. Let's be better than that.