2
Section One: The Fundamentals
A) History and Context
Exercise 1: Notebook Prompt
| In the “Tested” audio episode “Card Carrying Females,” I was particularly intrigued by the historical tale of Canada’s first all-female Indigenous basketball team. This team, founded in the 1940s, not only excelled in its sport but also defied prevalent gender conventions and racial biases of the time. Their tale focuses attention on the nexus of athletics, gender, and Indigenous identity, demonstrating how these players used basketball to promote empowerment and social change. Another startling component was the examination of the institutional hurdles that Indigenous female athletes still face today. Despite progress in gender equality and increasing exposure for women in sports, Indigenous women frequently face specific hurdles such as restricted access to resources, cultural insensitivity, and underrepresentation in mainstream sports media. This highlights the importance of more inclusive policies and support structures that recognize and meet the unique requirements of Indigenous athletes. The show also exposed me to the idea of “sport as a form of resistance” among Indigenous people. Sports are not simply a form of physical exercise, but also a tool to retain cultural customs, foster communal cohesiveness, and fight colonial narratives. This viewpoint expands our knowledge of sports beyond competition, presenting it as a critical instrument for cultural resilience and identity affirmation. Overall, the episode offered a nuanced examination of Indigenous female athletes’ problems and accomplishments, highlighting the significance of intersectionality in talks about sports and social justice.
|
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.
| 1999: The IOC formally ends mandatory sex verification but reserves the right to test in suspicious cases.
The 1999 IOC decision to remove mandatory sex verification is significant since it signalled a departure from intrusive and discriminatory testing techniques while remaining allowing for targeted testing in contentious circumstances. This adjustment mirrored rising scientific and ethical concerns regarding sex verification, paving the way for future discussions on gender inclusion in sports.
2018: The IAAF reinstates testosterone limits for specific events (400m to 1500m).
The IAAF’s restoration of testosterone limitations in 2018 was noteworthy since it directly affected athletes with naturally high testosterone levels, such as Caster Semenya, by limiting their ability to participate in some women’s events unless they medically decreased their testosterone. This judgment rekindled concerns about biological advantage, justice, and human rights, emphasizing the dichotomy between inclusion and competitive equity in top sports.
|
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 in sports has occasionally limited my involvement, as cultural assumptions regarding gender roles frequently limit women’s access or participation. Growing up, I noted that sports were frequently segregated by gender, with certain activities considered “masculine” and others as “feminine.” For example, team sports like as football and hockey were primarily male-dominated, with little support or resources available to girls who desired to join. This made it difficult to feel completely welcomed in areas that were not intended for women. In addition, there were subtle constraints on female athletes’ physical demands. Girls were frequently expected to be delicate, elegant, and nimble, which may inhibit participation in more physically demanding or “rough” sports. These expectations reinforced the sense that some sports were not for me, despite my desire to attempt them. However, I’ve been lucky in certain respects, as there have been supportive situations that have pushed me to follow my passions. Gendered beliefs about sports have altered throughout time, and while barriers remain, there is a movement for inclusiveness. As more female athletes break down preconceptions and question gender conventions in sports, it becomes easier to ignore these restraints. However, I know that for many people, gendered sports continue to limit their options and experiences. |
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?
| As I was going through and voting on the prompts that were in the Padlet I noticed that a lot of them generally confirmed what I believed with gender-coding. The ones that surprised me the most was the hockey one as there is a PWHL but mostly everyone voted that it was a male sport. |
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 disagree with Leah Thomas’ claim that trans women playing in women’s sports do not endanger women’s sports as a whole. While trans women constitute a small fraction of athletes, the emphasis on their involvement in women’s sports sometimes affects the discussion of larger problems such as justice, inclusion, and representation. The claim that trans women are not dominating is valid when considering the multiple hurdles to access, resources, and transition-related requirements, implying that the majority of trans women in sports do not have a competitive edge. However, mainstream media coverage of the issue, which is frequently driven by politicians and influencers, exaggerates the situation. The issue is not that trans women are inherently dominating women’s sports, but rather that the political narrative portrays them as dangers to the integrity of women’s competitions. This sensationalized story draws attention away from the real difficulties that women face in sports, such as uneven pay, a lack of support, and underrepresentation. Furthermore, the picture implying that this issue is exaggerated by individuals who do not sincerely care about women’s sports demonstrates how the argument is being manipulated to advance political or ideological goals. The actual discourse should be about providing more fair chances for all women in sports, regardless of gender identity, as well as tackling structural obstacles that limit possibilities for both cisgender and transgender women. |
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?
| In the “Unfair Advantage” podcast, host and writer Rose Evereth dives at the difficulties of what constitutes a “unfair advantage” in sports, particularly when trans women compete in women’s tournaments. She contends that the emphasis on trans women is frequently inappropriate, since it ignores greater concerns of biological advantages that athletes may have, regardless of gender. Evereth points out that certain athletes are born with physical characteristics that give considerable advantages, such as exceptional lung capacity, muscular mass, or bone density, which can contribute to peak performance in ways that are rarely questioned as unfair. Evereth highlights that athletes frequently benefit from circumstances beyond their control, such as genetics or access to money, and that these advantages are seldom challenged. For example, some athletes may have a natural proclivity for speed or endurance, and while these characteristics may give an advantage, they are not questioned in the same way that trans women’s involvement is. In a similar vein, factors such as wealth, access to training facilities, and coaching can have a significant impact on an athlete’s success, giving those with financial resources an advantage. There are several examples of athletes who benefited from unique biological or cultural advantages unrelated to their gender. For example, some athletes have remarkable flexibility or joint hypermobility, which can provide them a significant edge in sports like gymnastics and swimming. The same is true for athletes with strong cardiovascular endurance or natural speed, which can be beneficial in long-distance running or sprinting. Furthermore, athletes with larger body frames, such as some excellent basketball players, have a physical advantage in the game because of their reach, height, and leverage. Genetics has a significant impact on these advantages, which often go unrecognized since they do not entail gender identity. |
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.
| I agree with Katie Barnes that sports are not fundamentally fair, and we frequently tolerate unfairness in many forms. Barnes’ comment emphasizes a basic reality about competitive sports: they are based on variables that will never be completely equalized. Genetics, socioeconomic position, access to resources, and even luck all have an impact on outcomes, but we still consider them part of the game. Fairness is sometimes jeopardized, from the physical advantages some athletes may be born with to discrepancies in training facilities or coaching, yet it is nonetheless considered as part of the game. In my perspective, sports are rarely completely fair, especially given the multiple advantages that certain individuals or teams have. For example, athletes from more affluent homes may afford better equipment, training, and travel, giving them a major advantage. In team sports, a team’s amount of support—financial backing, infrastructure, or media exposure—can also influence its performance. Furthermore, certain athletes may have physical advantages owing to their body types that others cannot mimic, no matter how hard they work and practice. However, the idea of fairness in athletics is not always well-defined. While certain disparities are acknowledged, others are debated, such as transgender women in athletics or the use of performance-enhancing substances. Ultimately, fairness in athletics is frequently about equal opportunity rather than equal achievement, and even that can be ambiguous because not all circumstances are under an athlete’s control. |
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.
| Robins contends that the emphasis on “transvestigating” Olympic athletes—scrutinizing and questioning trans women’s gender identities in sports—is not truly concerned with fairness or competition integrity. Instead, it is a strategy for questioning the legitimacy of trans women’s existence and role in society. The word “transvestigating” refers to the process of deeply examining or “uncovering” trans women’s gender identities, typically in order to delegitimize their participation in women’s sports. According to Robins, the fundamental issue is not providing an equal playing field, but rather exploiting trans women’s involvement in sports to rekindle broader societal discussions about their rights and identities. According to Robins, the discourse around trans women in athletics is frequently used as a reason to challenge trans people’s basic existence and social legitimacy, particularly transfeminine ones. It’s less about sports and fairness than it is about expressing cultural discomfort or hatred against trans women and their feminine expressions. The intensive scrutiny and public debate around their involvement in sports are part of a larger cultural narrative aimed at undermining their gender identification. By framing the dispute in terms of sporting fairness, Robins contends that society conceals its fundamental concern: the unwillingness to recognize trans people as complete and authentic members of the gender category with which they identify. As a result, the attention on trans women athletes serves as a vehicle for reclaiming their right to exist as they are. |
