2
Section One: The Fundamentals
A) History and Context
Exercise 1: Notebook Prompt
| I had never heard of the athletes (Maximila, Christine, Shelly-Anne) mentioned in the podcast. I had known the concept of DSD, but I had never heard it referred to in this manner, which I found interesting. It seems ridiculous that Max was told to undress and was examined without even being told why, this seems like a serious invasion of privacy. I typically always thought the DSD athletes were always aware that they may have higher levels or had different make-up than other females. It would be heartbreaking to learn through these tests that she is unfit to compete. It seems that the testing of sex evolves with our technology, therefore, in this day and age, there should be multiple tests, not just testosterone testing. The Barr body test is a new concept to me as well. When they discussed needing to carry around cards that say they are female, it reminded me of the Indian Act when Indigenous individuals needed to carry a status card. I feel like the media makes it sound like trans women are just men who want to compete and win in women’s events, so it is good that this podcast states that has never happened. Not only is it discriminating against an athlete when they are labelled “not female,” but that would be damaging to their identity. I am shocked that the way women found out they were biologically different was through these tests and not through their doctors. It is good that the sports organizations discontinued their way of testing, not only for the athlete’s participation but for their identity.
|
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.
| If I could add to the timeline, I would add that in 1978, the Amateur Sports Act told the Olympic committee that there must be no sex discrimination for each sport (. Feminist Majority Foundation, 2020). in 2012, there was a declaration known as “The Los Angeles Declaration,” which gives ways to promote gender equality in sports for women. I would also add that in 1928, Elizabeth Roberson was the first woman to win gold in track and field (National Women’s History Museum, 2016). In 1948, Alice Coachman was the first woman of colour to win gold (National Women’s History Museum, 2016). Finally, I would add that at the 2024 Paris Olympics, there were more women present than ever, with a 50-50 split of males and females (Sy & Zahn, 2024).
References Equality for women in the Olympics. Feminist Majority Foundation. (2020). https://feminist.org/our-work/education-equity/gender-equity-in-athletics/equality-for-women-in-the-olympics/ National Women’s History Museum. (2016). Timeline: Women in the Olympics. https://www.womenshistory.org/exhibits/women-olympics-timeline Sy, S., & Zahn, H. (2024). Exploring the history of gender equity at the Olympics and where things stand Today. PBS. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/exploring-the-history-of-gender-equity-at-the-olympics-and-where-things-stand-today |
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?
| Gendering of sports did not directly impact my involvement in sports; as a child, the main constraint keeping me from sports was access as I lived in a very rural area, and the closest team for any sport was an hour away. Once I entered grades 7 and 8 (when you could compete in sports at the school), there were always men’s and women’s teams, and I felt included and happy to participate. I did notice gendered segregation at recess at times when boys would play soccer and would only want athletic girls to play with them. I noticed this happened more so with my female friends who played basketball and wanted to play with the boys. Typically, the boys would not take them seriously, even though the girls played at a higher level than the boys.
As I entered high school, I mostly participated in cross country, track and volleyball. I definitely noticed the gendered difference of volleyball (needing to wear the small spandex shorts). However, this was not a constraint to my participation because it did not bother me. What I loved about track and field and cross country was the minimal gendering within the sport. The men and women would train together and were always very supportive of one another. Where in most team sports, men and women train separately and are on different teams, the runners always train together, and it removed the gendering that I noticed in other sports like volleyball. I think sports that can train in a co-ed manner are great at removing that gendered bias because no matter how you identify, you have a team of both sexes and varying skill levels.
|
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?
| Football: Male
Soccer: Neutral Powerlifting: male Basketball: male Volleyball: female Hockey: male Gymnastics: female Softball: male I seem to be unable to see the poll results (says zero votes). I would assume that my guesses (maybe not soccer), would follow the vote of popular imagination. However, I feel that people may vote based on personal experience. Eg having an older sister who plays soccer makes you associate soccer as a female sport as that is what you grew up watching.
|
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 have mixed opinions on this statement. In order for me to have a fully educated opinion, I would be interested to see how often this small portion of trans athletes were winning. As I am a kinesiology student, I am aware that there are biological differences that make males physically stronger and faster. The amount of time that a trans woman has been suppressing their hormones would impact how much of a biological advantage they have. I do not think banning anyone from participating is ever the answer. However, I can see how females would feel frustrated when they are training hard and being beaten by someone who is genetically predisposition to be stronger due to their muscle fibre makeup. I do not think that politicians and influences who do not care about women’s sports should have any opinion about who can and cannot compete. I think that should be left up to organizations that are passionate about women’s sports. When politicians or influences begin to get involved in having a say over women and what they should and should not be able to do, it takes away from the freedom and autonomy of our society.
|
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?
| Rose Eveleth looks at the idea of “unfair advantage” within sports and how it is not well defined. She discusses that there are at least 20 genetic factors that are correlated with athletic performance. These mutations are not seen in everyone, which is why some athletes are better than others. However, she questions why the sport testing exclusively looks at testosterone levels and DSD athletes. When some biological advantages are celebrated, others create exclusion and rules. Advantages that are connected to sex seem to be fair game to measure and regulate. These rules negatively impact marginalized groups, such as Black women, and we see this with Maxine and Caster Semenya. Creating rules around specific sex characteristics eliminates women who are born with different characteristics, even though other athletes born with different physiological characteristics are praised. Therefore, the fair vs unfair advantage is not clear and is based on our society, not on biology. It seems that politics plays a much larger role in our rules than we may realize, and plays more of a role than they should.
Other athletes who have significantly benefited from genetic variations include Michael Phelps, Ero Mantyranta, Usain Bolt, and Kenyan distance runners. Each of these athletes were gifted with genetic differences that allowed them to have physiological advantages to their sport, gender had nothing to do with their success.
|
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 favour: I do not think sports are fair at any level of competition. At the youth level, the fairness, in my experience, would typically come down to affordability and access to sports. Growing up in a rural community, participating in sports required that parents drive (upwards of hours) to get to practices and games. Not only was this difficult for parents to do in terms of a time commitment, but it was also costly. So some children were not able to participate in sports, even though they had the talent and work ethic. Looking at sports as a whole, politics, access, social norms, and physical ability are all factors that make the playing field unfair. For example, you could train for years at a sport and put in time, and another athlete who has put in less work could take your spot all because of having better physiological adaptations. At the pro level, factors such as sponsorship opportunities and systematic biases can limit an athlete’s access to excellent coaching. This is why socio-economic status (as with most things) is one of the biggest determining factors of sports success. There is also the issue of biases when coaches are creating their teams. We learn in sports psychology that coaches always have unconscious biases, which can be based on the athlete’s physical appearance. Therefore, if the coach has any bias, whether it be sexism or racism, that can impact whether an athlete makes the team, creating an unfair environment. |
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.
| Robin is saying that the rules and regulations around sex and sport have nothing to do with making sure that women’s sport is fair. The rules have to do with discrimination against trans athletes specifically. She says that the expression of trans femininity is frowned upon by society, and the media uses sports to express their discomfort with trans women verbally. She says that the public and open nature of sports allows these views to be spoken without much retaliation because they can use cis women athletes to express that they felt cheated. Robin states that by using fairness as an excuse, they are able to open up conversations about trans women that typically would not be acceptable, and their motive has nothing to do with the sport itself.
|
