2
Section One: The Fundamentals
A) History and Context
Exercise 1: Notebook Prompt
In episode three of Tested, I learned what the term DSD stands for and what it means for athletes (Eveleth, 2024). DSD stands for “difference of sex development”, based on the podcast, this primarily applies to female athletes who have a higher testosterone than their competitors. Unfortunately, all of the DSD athletes are given a choice to either change their bodies through medication or give up competing in female sports. I also learned that the notion of excluding female athletes that possess male-dominant biology started in the 1960s when females who looked like males were excluded from competing. I was surprised to learn that this exclusion evolved when the Barr body tests came into play in 1967. The Barr bodies test were administered to female athletes to identify the type of cells they had. I was extremely surprised to hear that when females passed the test, they were given a “femininity card” that proves they are female. In order to compete in female sports, they had to carry this card around to all of the competitions.
In terms of the story of Maximila Imali, I was shocked to learn that when she was told to get an examination and testing at the hospital, they did not tell her what she was being tested for. It felt as if everything was a secret, which was why she didn’t find out about the results or what the tests were for, until several months later. I was also surprised to learn that Kenya Athletics thought she would ruin the name and image of their country because she had naturally higher testosterone. I was expecting Kenya to support her throughout her battle against these unfair rules.
Eveleth, R (Host). (2024). Tested: Episode 3: Card-Carrying Females [Audio podcast]. CBC. https://www.cbc.ca/listen/cbc-podcasts/1733-tested/episode/16082853-episode-3-card-carrying-females
B) Timeline of History
Exercise 2: Notebook Prompt
What other significant case/milestone would you add to this timeline? Note it in your notebook along with a brief (one or two sentences) explanation of why you feel it is important.
| I would add two moments to the timeline to further demonstrate sex verification in sport. The first case I would add is from the year 1968 when the International Olympic Committee (IOC) mandated gender verification for female athletes at the Olympic games. Next, I would add the moment when the IOC stopped the mandated gender verification for female athletes in 1998. While the addition of gender verification for females in 1968 is a more negative moment, I feel it is important to include because it provides insight into the starting point of gender-focused testing, rather than just utilizing the timeline for sex verification. The addition of the 1998 milestone would then demonstrate the progress that had been made since 1968. In general, adding gender verification to the timeline is valuable for understanding how the sporting culture has evolved socially, while simultaneously promoting gender equality through the cessation of female-only gender verifications.
|
C) Gender coding in Sports
Exercise 3: Notebook Prompt
Has the gendering of sport ever been a constraint on your involvement? How?
Or, if not, why do you think this is?
| The gendering of sport has never been a constraint on my involvement in sports, despite playing rugby, hockey and soccer competitively for many years of my life. Unfortunately, I believe this to be the case because I am a male. Throughout all of my athletic experiences, I have always fit the model of what a male athlete should look like. I have been told I am strong, tall and athletic, this means that from my perspective, I have not seen the gendering of sport take place. However, as stated on Blackboard and in the book Fair Play, “whether we realize it or not, our sports are coded, laden with allusions to gender and sexuality” (Barnes, 2023). This demonstrates that I have most likely encountered a situation where gendering of sport occurred, whether I was a part of it or just a spectator, but I wasn’t aware it was transpiring. Ultimately, the gendering of sport had no constraint on my involvement but I do believe I was naturally a part of the “cultural assumptions about who plays each sport” (Barnes, 2023). This is solely because I look and act like a typical male athlete, which creates expectations toward playing more physical sports like rugby and hockey, as I did.
Barnes, K. (2023). Fair Play: How Sports Shape the Gender Debate. St. Martin’s Publishing Group. https://www.overdrive.com/media/9496705/fair-play
|
D) How is sport gendered in the popular imagination?
Exercise 4: Padlet/Notebook Prompt
While most sports are in fact unisex, gender coding remains pervasive, particularly at the professional level, although with a foundation established in youth competition. Participate in the poll below to share your views on how popular sports are gendered in the popular imagination. Also feel welcome to add or suggest sports that you feel strongly conform to the gender binary!
After you contribute to the padlet prompt, record your response in your notebook AND briefly discuss in two or three sentences how these responses and the polling figures in general confirm or contradict your assumptions about gender-coding and sports. Did anything surprise you?
| Padlet response: Football – Male, Soccer – Neutral, Power Lifting – Neutral, Basketball – Neutral, Volleyball – Female, Hockey – Neutral, Gymnastics – Female, Softball – Female
For the most part, the polling responses confirmed my assumptions, especially for gymnastics, football and volleyball. However, I was surprised to see that some people thought softball was gendered towards males, whereas I see softball as a female sport, with baseball being the male version of it. Finally, it felt like hockey, soccer, power lifting, and basketball had mixed opinions between either a male sport or neutral which I found interesting considering it feels like males and females participate in those sports quite equally.
|
Section Two: Breaking it down
A) Title IX
Exercise 5: Notebook Prompt
In a longer version of the interview excerpted in the video above, Leah Thomas states “Trans women competing in women’s sports does not threaten women’s sports as a whole because trans women are a very small minority of all athletes and the NCAA rules around trans women competing in women’s sports have been around for 10+ years and we haven’t seen any massive wave of trans women dominating”?
Do you agree with this statement? See also the image above suggesting that the issue may be overblown by politicians and influencers who don’t actually care that much about women’s sports.
Please share any thoughts you have in your Notebook by clicking on the audio button above or writing a few sentences.
| I agree with the statement that Leah Thomas made because of the very small minority of trans women competing in women’s sports. If that small minority consistently abides by the NCAA rules that have been around for over 10 years, then I see it as a completely fair situation. If a trans woman comes into a sport and dominates, there shouldn’t be a large uproar over it because as history shows, every once in a while a highly talented individual takes a sport by storm. I feel as if it gets overblown by the media and politicians because it provides them with a story or an argument to present, therefore, their focus isn’t on the sport itself. Ultimately, as long as trans women are within the regulations that have been set, then they are fully allowed to dominate and display their athletic ability.
|
B) Unfair Advantage?
Exercise 6: Notebook Prompt
What does the host and writer, Rose Eveleth, have to say on the issue of unfair advantage?
Can you think of other examples of unique biological or circumstantial advantages from which athletes have benefitted enormously that have nothing to do with gender?
| At the start of the podcast Rose Eveleth posed the question “what does it mean, in sports, to have an unfair advantage?” (Eveleth, 2024). This created a discussion surrounding the genetics and biology of athletes. Rose mentioned that Michael Phelps had an advantage due to his long torso and smaller legs, which made his body perfect for swimming. She also mentioned that some athletes have genetic mutations that increase their ability to produce red blood cells, ultimately increasing their aerobic capacity and performance. Therefore, Rose made it very clear that biological conditions provide many unfair advantages across sports. However, that doesn’t mean that athletes with those natural advantages should have to take medications to alter their bodies and equal the playing field. Rose clarified that advantages tied to sex should be fair game since those athletes were simply born that way, and did not alter their biological makeup themselves.
Another example of a unique biological and circumstantial advantage is the Kenyan and Ethiopian runners. Many distance runners from those countries grow up in high-altitude environments which naturally enhances their oxygen efficiency, prolonging their endurance ability. There are also equipment advancements like running shoes or stream-lined swimsuits that have provided extreme advantages leading to certain equipment getting banned as a result of the performance increases it produced.
Eveleth, R (Host). (2024). Tested: Episode 5: Unfair Advantage? [Audio podcast]. CBC. https://www.cbc.ca/listen/cbc-podcasts/1733-tested/episode/16084365-episode-5-unfair-advantage
|
Again, let’s turn to Katie Barnes who points out that we tend to forget amidst all the debate that “sports, by design, are not fair” (235), that “the reality of sports is that we accept unfairness all the time” (235).
Do you agree? Why? In your experience, how fair are sports? Feel welcome to add a video response in the padlet and provide an example if you’re willing. Make sure you include a screenshot of your response in your notebook.
In favor: The idea that “sports, by design, are not fair” can be applied to both elite sports and youth recreational levels. However, I believe that elite sports are less unfair compared to youth situations. From my experience, the largest difference in youth sports is the access to resources and favouritism in coaches. Many youth coaches have kids on the team which ensures the coach’s kid gets more attention and playing time. This typically means that some kids don’t get appropriate playing time and opportunities. Also, some kids don’t have the funds to seek additional training or high-end equipment that can improve performance. However, once an individual reaches an elite level, those issues typically disappear because every team has resources and a dedicated coaching staff. Elite sports become unfair based on the geographical location of the team. For example, some teams in the NHL have no state tax, meaning players can make more money, so they attract far more quality players than other teams. So while every team has high-end development and resources to offer, sports become unfair on the business side of things. Ultimately, no one will ever be on an equal playing field whether it is recreational or elite, and based on my personal experience there is always an aspect of politics that makes sports unfair.
Respond to someone against: (when I wrote my response no one was against)
I find your argument about rules favouring specific playing styles and physical qualities very interesting. While it is true that certain sports require specific body types that can provide an unfair advantage. The notion of playing styles seems more like an ability to adapt rather than being an unfair component of sport. Ultimately, if an athlete throughly understands their sport and possesses a high level of skill, they should have the ability to modify their play style to specific rules of the sport. For example, an enforcer type player in hockey might have to alter their game to match the more fast paced and skilled components that hockey is evolving into. Fortunately, sports always progress which ensures they remain entertaining, rather than be played the same way for hundreds of years. However, I do agree with your idea that if we admit the unfairness of sport, then athletes can receive the recognition they deserve for the obstacles they endured.
B) The Paris Olympics
Optional Response:
What does Robins mean when she argues that:
“The aims of transvestigating an Olympic athlete are not, in any meaningful sense, anything to do with sports, or fairness, or even with women (cis women, at least) as a social category. Rather, they have everything to do with transness, and the public expression of transfemininity.
For my money this has never been about sport.
What it has always been is an excuse to publicly relitigate the existence of trans women.”
Make a note in your Notebook.
What Robins means is that the actions of transphobia stem from the rooted societal anxieties and discrimination against transness and transfemininity. While some people believe that the actions come from wanting to uphold fairness and integrity in sport, she is essentially saying that there is a link to our current societal beliefs. These beliefs are the driving force towards the transphobia that is currently being displayed in media, politics and sport. Since sport is popular within our societies, it gathers a lot of attention, when that attention fills up with trans athletes who are succeeding, people become resistant to the recognition they are receiving because it is occurring in a popular public space.
