Start Date
26-6-2010 10:45 AM
End Date
26-6-2010 11:45 AM
Description
This presentation is part of the Gender and Sport track.
This paper examines the concepts of sex/gender, rules, and values using a case study of the eligibility requirements for participating in the Olympic Games. As a global event that attracts more than one billion viewers, the impact of the Olympic Games is substantial. Stemming from a larger project that questions whether rules governing participation in the Olympics function to facilitate the attainment of the values and ideals associated with the Olympic Games, this paper focuses on the tension between the Olympic Charter’s mandate of non-discrimination and specific rules found within the Charter that continue to promote an exclusionary environment for women. As the Olympic Charter clearly states that discrimination is intolerable in the Olympic movement, a dilemma arises when official policies and rules fail to uphold the values the movement espouses to represent.
Methods of limiting the number of athletes that compete in the Olympic Games are warranted to ensure the size of the festivals does not exceed the capacities of local organizing committees to manage and host the events. Equality in the simplest sense is impossible in a competition like the Olympic Games, which has a set limit of 10,500 participating athletes but attracts the interest of billions of people worldwide. Numerous countries have at least 10,500 aspiring Olympic hopefuls training in various sports, so the set quota could be filled several times with athletes from just one country if eligibility rules were not in place. Eligibility criteria are needed to regulate and control the number of participants and officials taking part in the Olympic Games for practical, environmental, and economic reasons. However, the rules that specify precise eligibility requirements must be fair, just, and consistently applied to all aspiring Olympians if the Olympic Games are to achieve the values associated with the movement.
Four core values are emphasized in the International Olympic Committee’s official publications and by scholars studying the Olympic movement. These four values include a notion of fairness (which includes fair play, justice, and respect for the rules, traditions, opponents, and one’s self), a call for equality and non-discrimination (that respects human rights, athletes’ rights, and autonomy), a focus on ethical behaviour (including the embodiment of virtues such as honesty, courage, excellence, and honour), and the use of education to promote peace and understanding through sport. Together these four components define the term ‘Olympism’ and represent the core values associated with the Olympic Games. These values are unique to the Olympic Games and are not associated with other elite-level competitions to the same extent; moreover, it is these values that retain the high level of sponsorship the Olympic Games currently attracts due to its association with ethics and values.
Through a content analysis of the Olympic Charter and the rulebooks of eight International Sports Federations that participate at the Olympic Games, I determined the methods used to delimit and restrict participation. In addition to minimum performance standards, eligibility rules contained within the documents include rules regarding: 1) sex and gender categories; 2) anti-doping; 3) citizenship; 4) behaviour and dispute resolution; 5) uniforms and competitive attire; and 6) age limits. This presentation focuses on the eligibility rules set by the International Olympic Committee that require different standards for male and female competitors. I examine the history of the rule development and modification processes to determine when the rules came into effect and what motivated members of the International Olympic Committee to adopt each rule. In particular, I question the ‘science’ that members of the International Olympic Committee relied on to set eligibility standards. I will show how the International Olympic Committee’s leaders used selective scientific data and reports to justify exclusionary practices, and how the International Olympic Committee’s endorsement of discriminatory policies established unjustifiable rules as the norm for elite sports.
While most Olympic eligibility rules are acceptable and do not contradict an athlete’s pursuit of the Olympic values, there are rules in force at the Olympic Games that are unjustifiable from a liberal feminist perspective. Tensions between the Olympic values and current rules relate to sex inequality, autonomy, privacy, and paternalism. In particular, three specific areas require immediate attention. The first involves rules that mandate the differential and inequitable treatment of men and women. The second involves paternalistic requirements toward adult athletes that limit their options in participating. The third involves the requirement that athletes wear uniforms that may fail to respect their beliefs and values. Focusing on rules related to required differences among men’s and women’s events, I will discuss specific examples of contentious rules to illustrate how policies contained in the Olympic Charter contribute to maintaining the Olympic Games as an arena that perpetuates sex inequality and the violation of athletes’ rights. In doing so, I will present alternatives to problematic rules and call for the elimination or modification of contentious rules to help eradicate discriminatory practices from elite sport.
Included in
Contradictory Values and Rules: The Case of Olympic Sports
This presentation is part of the Gender and Sport track.
This paper examines the concepts of sex/gender, rules, and values using a case study of the eligibility requirements for participating in the Olympic Games. As a global event that attracts more than one billion viewers, the impact of the Olympic Games is substantial. Stemming from a larger project that questions whether rules governing participation in the Olympics function to facilitate the attainment of the values and ideals associated with the Olympic Games, this paper focuses on the tension between the Olympic Charter’s mandate of non-discrimination and specific rules found within the Charter that continue to promote an exclusionary environment for women. As the Olympic Charter clearly states that discrimination is intolerable in the Olympic movement, a dilemma arises when official policies and rules fail to uphold the values the movement espouses to represent.
Methods of limiting the number of athletes that compete in the Olympic Games are warranted to ensure the size of the festivals does not exceed the capacities of local organizing committees to manage and host the events. Equality in the simplest sense is impossible in a competition like the Olympic Games, which has a set limit of 10,500 participating athletes but attracts the interest of billions of people worldwide. Numerous countries have at least 10,500 aspiring Olympic hopefuls training in various sports, so the set quota could be filled several times with athletes from just one country if eligibility rules were not in place. Eligibility criteria are needed to regulate and control the number of participants and officials taking part in the Olympic Games for practical, environmental, and economic reasons. However, the rules that specify precise eligibility requirements must be fair, just, and consistently applied to all aspiring Olympians if the Olympic Games are to achieve the values associated with the movement.
Four core values are emphasized in the International Olympic Committee’s official publications and by scholars studying the Olympic movement. These four values include a notion of fairness (which includes fair play, justice, and respect for the rules, traditions, opponents, and one’s self), a call for equality and non-discrimination (that respects human rights, athletes’ rights, and autonomy), a focus on ethical behaviour (including the embodiment of virtues such as honesty, courage, excellence, and honour), and the use of education to promote peace and understanding through sport. Together these four components define the term ‘Olympism’ and represent the core values associated with the Olympic Games. These values are unique to the Olympic Games and are not associated with other elite-level competitions to the same extent; moreover, it is these values that retain the high level of sponsorship the Olympic Games currently attracts due to its association with ethics and values.
Through a content analysis of the Olympic Charter and the rulebooks of eight International Sports Federations that participate at the Olympic Games, I determined the methods used to delimit and restrict participation. In addition to minimum performance standards, eligibility rules contained within the documents include rules regarding: 1) sex and gender categories; 2) anti-doping; 3) citizenship; 4) behaviour and dispute resolution; 5) uniforms and competitive attire; and 6) age limits. This presentation focuses on the eligibility rules set by the International Olympic Committee that require different standards for male and female competitors. I examine the history of the rule development and modification processes to determine when the rules came into effect and what motivated members of the International Olympic Committee to adopt each rule. In particular, I question the ‘science’ that members of the International Olympic Committee relied on to set eligibility standards. I will show how the International Olympic Committee’s leaders used selective scientific data and reports to justify exclusionary practices, and how the International Olympic Committee’s endorsement of discriminatory policies established unjustifiable rules as the norm for elite sports.
While most Olympic eligibility rules are acceptable and do not contradict an athlete’s pursuit of the Olympic values, there are rules in force at the Olympic Games that are unjustifiable from a liberal feminist perspective. Tensions between the Olympic values and current rules relate to sex inequality, autonomy, privacy, and paternalism. In particular, three specific areas require immediate attention. The first involves rules that mandate the differential and inequitable treatment of men and women. The second involves paternalistic requirements toward adult athletes that limit their options in participating. The third involves the requirement that athletes wear uniforms that may fail to respect their beliefs and values. Focusing on rules related to required differences among men’s and women’s events, I will discuss specific examples of contentious rules to illustrate how policies contained in the Olympic Charter contribute to maintaining the Olympic Games as an arena that perpetuates sex inequality and the violation of athletes’ rights. In doing so, I will present alternatives to problematic rules and call for the elimination or modification of contentious rules to help eradicate discriminatory practices from elite sport.