Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Meaning of Sport Among Filipino Athletes
Meaning of Sport Among Filipino Athletes
The paper aims to determine if there is a congruency between the meaning and function
of sport as defined by Philippine national athletes vis-à-vis the objectives of sport as
institutionally defined by the Philippine government. A comparison of the athletes’ perspectives
and the Philippine government’s institutional goals presents cultural considerations for
formulating the country’s sport development policies and programs. The dominant concept
of the meaning and function of sport that surfaced among Philippine national athletes was
discipline. Discipline appears to be a controlling structure outside of the self, and is also
interestingly translated as an equivalent to time. The concept of fitness through sports was
articulated by the participants but not discussed in depth. Sport was also indicated as a means
to gain free education, money in the form of allowances and incentives, and possible
advancement in work. Interestingly for some, winning for the country was not a primary
objective, and was only realized after participation in international competitions. The gap
between cultural and institutional perspectives as revealed in the study has serious implications
for the future of sports in the Philippines.
Key words: meaning of sport, Filipino athletes, discipline, Filipino concept of health and
fitness, Philippines
1
Department of Sport Studies, College of Human Kinetics, University of the Philippines Diliman,
Quezon City 1101, Philippines *Corresponding author – e-mail: rupeneyra@yahoo.com
2
Department of Anthropology, College of Social Science and Philosophy, University of the
Philippines Diliman, Quezon City 1101, Philippines
INTRODUCTION
The 1987 Philippine Constitution states in Article II Section 13 that, along with
education, science and technology, arts and culture, sports must be given priority by
the State so that it can act as a vehicle to “foster patriotism and nationalism, accelerate
social progress, and promote total human liberation and development.” In addition,
Article XIV Section 19 states that the State is tasked to “promote physical education
and encourage sports programs, league competitions, and amateur sports, including
training for international competition, to foster self-discipline, teamwork and excellence
for the development of a healthy and alert citizenry.”
As a consequence of these articles, the Philippine Sports Commission (PSC)
was created. The PSC is the government’s regulatory national agency responsible for
coordinating all amateur sports development programs and institutions in the
Philippines, as well as, formulating policies on such programs and institutions. Its
two organizational targets as listed in the Logical Framework of the PSC are “excellent
participation in international sports competitions (high level)”, and a “widened source
of athletic talents and increased participation in sports (mass-based)”. The vision
of the PSC is that the Commission must have “…a unified sports program which will
enhance the quality of life of the Filipinos, instill national pride and attain international
prestige through excellence in sports.”
The Philippines is also a signatory to the United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) International Charter of Physical Education
and Sports. At the individual level, Article II Section 2 of the Charter states that
physical education and sport “contribute to the maintenance and improvement of
health, provide a wholesome leisure time occupation and enable man to overcome the
drawbacks of modern living.” Since Article III Section 1 states that “physical education
and sports programmes must be designed to suit the requirements and personal
characteristics of those practicing them,” this study aims to determine how high
performance Filipino athletes’ concepts of the function of sport compare with the
PSC’s and the 1987 Philippine Constitution’s purposes of sport. It examines the
meanings created by Philippine national athletes to determine if there is a congruence
between the athletes’ perspectives on sport vis-à-vis the producers’ and organizers’
intentions.
The outcome of the study is set against Rivera et al.’s (1988, in Beran 1989)
unpublished seminar paper on the role of sports in the Philippines as defined by
government and private institutions that function as sport organizers and producers
in the Philippines. Rivera et al. (1988) surveyed Filipino sports leaders (N=40) who
represented the Philippine Olympic Committee, Gintong Alay, National Sports
Associations, the Department of Education Culture and Sports, university athletic
associations, armed forces of the Philippines, and the sports departments of business
firms. Nearly half (47%) stated that the role of sports is to contribute to the
development of nationhood, a third (35%) stated the sports promote health and
fitness of the citizenry, and 12% expressed that sports served as an instrument for
from casual, pleasure-based sport where winning might be a goal, but is not the
primary motive for participation (Thomas 1983). As Thomas explains, “[w]hile the
commitment may be the same, the intent of the performer may set the foundation of
the kinds of meaning derived from the sport experience” (ibid. p. 94).
Culture and the body. The body exists in a variety of forms, such as the lived or
phenomenological body (what and how we feel with the body), the social body (the
body both as metaphor and source of metaphors), and the body politic (the body as
subject to control) (Lock & Scheper-Hughes 1988). Each of these is experienced
simultaneously as the body moves through various domains, whether in illness or in
sporting activity. Thus, a phenomenological experience of sensation such as the
adrenaline rush of a high-intensity activity is interpreted as positive if the cultural
setting values such experiences (the runner’s high being an example). Conversely,
particular sensations such as pain may be disvalued such that an athlete will continue
to perform even if the pain is an indicator of injury, especially when salaries are at
stake and the athlete is monitored by the sponsors. This in turn resonates with
Shilling (2005) and with Turner (1992) and echoes Foucault’s idea of a body subject
to a disciplinary regime (1977).
The social context. The body is nested in a set of relationships that define what a
body is and how the owner of that body should behave. Thus, in Jocano’s [2003
(1973)] ethnography of a fishing community in Bay, Laguna, health (kalusugan) is
equated to strength (malakas), litheness (matipuno), all of which in turn are part of
the ability to work. Health equals productivity; a matter of concern in a fishing
community, where people work with their hands. Physical ability and aesthetic
appearance of the body are joined together in the concept of health. The converse
follows: to be unable to do one’s daily routine is to be unhealthy [may sakit (is sick)].
This set of relationships also defines obligations and rights within the community.
Beyond being healthy, one is obligated to act on this condition to fulfill one’s duties
to others, which include the obligation to support one’s family. Strength and health
are therefore not simply desirable in and of themselves, but are means to fulfill familial
and social obligations.
In the wider context, it would be good to think of the extent to which personal
relationships overlap with institutional rules. Various researchers from different fields
have called attention to the ways in which there is a distinct lack of overlap between
the institutional and the cultural (Jocano 1997, 1999; Bulatao 1992). Do these concepts
of health, fitness and social relationships overlap with institutional knowledge and
policies? This question becomes relevant especially as this paper explores how the
idea of sport is constructed from the point of view of the athletes.
of the participants were athletics, cycling, judo, fencing, taekwondo, traditional boat
race, water polo, and wushu. Winning a gold and/or silver medal in the Southeast
Asian Games (SEA Games) was the qualifier for the participants to be considered as
elite athletes. ‘Class A’ athletes have won at least one gold in the SEA Games, and
‘class B’ athletes have won at least one silver.
For this paper, the original transcription of the interviews was re-examined to
compare the athletes’ views on meanings in sport with the objectives set by the
government agency which they are under and accountable to. The results presented
in brackets are the English translations of the original data which were mostly in the
Philippine language Tagalog. Otherwise, the participants expressed themselves in
English.
RESULTS
The dominant theme that surfaced was the concept of discipline, reflected in
Peneyra’s (2007) thesis as both the meaning and primary function of sport regardless
of the athlete’s age, gender, or sport participated in:
Athlete No. 5 (male/28 years old/wushu/class A/high school graduate/full-time
athlete): [It’s like you will learn a lot that you will otherwise not get an opportunity
to learn outside, once you are in sport. Especially if you are in the Philippine
Team. For example discipline. You have to be disciplined in every thing you do
every day. You need to wake up early to train. Then you need to rest in the
afternoon; you can’t waste time on other things. You need to rest and to be ready
for training.]
Athlete No. 6 (male/26 years old/athletics-sprint/class B/college graduate/full-
time athlete): “Many of the people from different walks of life, they say that sports
is just a play, or game. But if they really try to know, if they really [get] involve[d
on] what really [sic] sport has, [they will see that] you can define sports in many
ways. Especially [in] sports, you can also develop self-discipline. You can rest
early. You develop self-confidence because you [are] practicing yourself to avoid
drinking those which could affect the performances of an athlete, and also you
learn to rest early like that. Wake up early. Like that, like that. Your daily routine
is very, ano ba’ to [that is to say], it seems like in a discipline[d] way; because you
cannot just do extraordinary things which could just affect your performance as
an athlete, especially those elite athlete[s] who compete in international
competition.”
Athlete No.11 (female/26 years old/fencing/class A/vocational school graduate/
full-time athlete): “[When you get into a sport, the first thing that enters your
mind is that this is where you will be disciplined, this is where you will learn; it is
just like school. At home, your parents are your teachers; and here, this is like
your second home. Just like school is your second home, this is my second
family. They teach me the proper way to play; you are really disciplined here. You
don’t have vices. You don’t get lost. Other kids in the streets, their parents don’t
take care of them. At least here they see that you are doing good for yourself.]”
National Team, PhP8,000 (~US$186). If you win internationally like the SEA Games,
it’s already PhP12,000 (~US$280). So I said to myself, wow, this is great.]”
Note: The dollar equivalents provided are based on current rates (US$1 = PhP43).
Athlete No. 18 (male/21 years old/cycling/class B/high school graduate/full-time
athlete): “[For me, this is my livelihood. There is an allowance. There are the
supplies, the vitamins.]”
National athletes are representatives of their countries. However, the data revealed
that some of Filipino athletes interviewed only realized this upon participation and
winning in international events. Some have made a distinction that sport is only for
the country if participated in internationally. What is highlighted is that winning
internationally is the reward for the sacrifices and hardship of training; and afterwards
winning for the country is then realized. It appears that sport is focused primarily on
the self, which has a greater relevance to the athletes compared to the honor of
representing the country.
Athlete No. 11: “[At first this was just like play for me. I wasn’t really thinking
that it’s for the country. I was thinking it’s just for me. So when I started competing
in other countries, I began to realize that this is not just for me, or my family; I
carry the honor of the Philippines. You really carry it with you wherever you go.
Because when we competed, many asked what country I was from. We said the
Philippines. They were surprised that there were athletes that were that young. I
became proud that other countries admired how good I was. Of course I was
proud of myself.]”
Athlete No. 16: “[When we became champions in Hong Kong and Indonesia, I
was so proud. That’s when you realize that you are not just representing yourself.
The country is at the back of your head; you also think about it. When you win,
you think about your accomplishment. You recall that training was so difficult.
That it was worth it. It’s different; the feeling is also different.]”
Athlete No. 6: “When you say about sports, it is for yourself. It can also be for
the country, if it is international. It can be for the benefit of the self, and for the
benefit of the country.”
Notably, out of the 19 athletes interviewed, only one voiced out aiming for
competing in the Olympics:
Athlete No. 9: The reason why I left my job is to train full time in sports, because
my goal, or my hope is to qualify for the Olympics. So yun yung hope ko [So that
is my hope]. For others that may be far-fetched. But ako [me] I think, with
everything that has been unfolding lately, I think it’s possible na [that] I qualify.
Kasi [Because] Philippine sports has not been in the limelight for so long; and we
even haven’t gotten a single gold medal. I felt na [that] with my gift, I have to
develop it. So parang [it’s like] since I felt that my gift is in sports, I train hard, I
work hard, so that when I reach that certain level in Philippine sports, then I can
be an inspiration to others.
DISCUSSION
The concept of discipline that developed among Filipino athletes were equated
with time management and structured routine, which are controlling factors essential
to their sporting life, and apparently were either not present or not highlighted outside
of their sport experience. It is also curiously apparent that discipline was acquired
only through the experience of sport. The regimen of training, which includes time,
structure and purpose requires strict adherence. Discipline for the Filipino athlete
then appears to be a controlling structure outside of the self, and is also interestingly
translated as an equivalent to the structure of time. Discipline in other words steered
the athlete’s life trajectory towards an idealized self (a disciplined person) characterized
by control of one’s daily schedule; obedience to parents, teachers, coach; focus on
the tasks of the moment; and away from an otherwise aimless existence.
As stated in the 1987 Philippine Constitution, sport and training for international
competition was meant to foster self-discipline so that participants would develop
into ‘healthy and alert’ citizens. While discipline was indeed instilled among the
athletes, this was primarily associated with strict time-keeping.
The concept of fitness through sports was articulated but not discussed in
depth. Fitness is an attribute (strength) or skill, or means of resistance to sickness,
which is considered as part of the continuum of health, i.e. on the other side of
wellness. You are healthy if you are well and plainly not sick. This reflects traditional
Filipino concepts of health and illness, which equate health with strength, vigor and
vitality (the combination of the first two, reflected in one’s appearance). Fitness as a
concept in itself seems to have been overlaid on top of the indigenous ideas of
health, thus accounting for the striking difference between the ways the athletes
articulate what fitness means and its technical definition.
While sport is a means to alter the life trajectory of the athlete from vices to
success, it also allows access to education and jobs. It is a means to secure money
and material needs. However, this access is again articulated in terms of a wider
network of responsibilities towards the family. The athlete therefore is a breadwinner;
in some cases, the only breadwinner in the family. Participation in elite (fulltime)
sports, with the concomitant monetary incentives, is therefore a means of fulfilling
familial obligations. This can take the form of scholarships (which can help reduce
the strains on family budgets and therefore facilitate the continuing education of the
young athlete), allowances (if on the national team), prize money (for every medal
won) and salaries (from coaching and related jobs).
Nationalism is expressed through the act of winning for the country. Nationalism
is tied to victory in the sport: the sentiment of fellow-feeling for others (Anderson,
2003) is more palpable when one wins a medal in international competition.
CONCLUSION
Significantly, there is a gap between what the athletes have expressed as their
perception of sport and what Vinokur (1988) has stated to be the main goal of sport at
the elite level: winning. None of them expressed the ideal that sport is about winning.
Winning is explored through how one feels when one is victorious. Winning is
expressed in terms of the emotions, but is not stated as the goal.
How do these statements relate to the stated goals of the PSC? The athletes
lend credence to the goal of the PSC only in as much as participation in sport is
equated to maintaining health, and for some a way towards victory for the country.
However, the predominant sentiment of the athletes is that their participation in
sports is linked to the personal goals of taking control of one’s life (discipline) as well
as a means of fulfilling family obligations (support for the family).
What would account for the apparent disparity between the two sets of goals?
The lack of continuity between individual athletes’ goals and the objectives set forth
by the Philippine Sports Commission is remarkable. The assessment is that to a great
extent, the athletes have not internalized the desired goals of the PSC regarding
sports and their performance.
The goals of the PSC, while clear and concise, nevertheless exist at the
institutional level. These goals are not articulated at the everyday level of the athletes
themselves. Thus, in the narratives shared by the athletes, there is consistent
connection or identification by the athletes with the stated goals of the institution.
Most athletes defined sport in both personal (relating to discipline) and relational
(support for the family) terms. However, the discussion reflects what they had already
attained as of the time of the interview. Only one athlete expressed any sense of
going beyond present achievements to represent the country in future competition,
such as the Olympics.
It is no surprise therefore that while Filipino athletes have placed highly in the
SEA Games in some sport events, few rank highly in the Asian Games and so much
less proceed to the Olympics. In the 2008 Beijing Olympics, the Philippine contingent
consisted of only 15 athletes who competed in eight events, i.e., athletics, archery,
boxing, diving, swimming, shooting, taekwondo and weightlifting.
The lack of articulation between the official vision and the personal interpretation
may be attributable to a mind set of survival, in that beyond achieving the personal
goals of personal discipline and providing for the family, the athletes do not articulate
sport in the same sense that Vinokur does for elite sports (1988). For that matter,
neither do they go beyond survival to think of the future. Instead, the focus is on the
present. In a context where the future is often uncertain, perhaps this way of thinking
is understandable. As Bulatao, Jocano and others have noted, this disjuncture and
uncertainty are rooted in a colonial past, where the official is imposed on the cultural,
and where achievement is not always rewarded accordingly but at times is even
taken.
This gap has serious implications for the future of sports in the Philippines. An
institution such as the PSC will have to take the cultural meanings of sports into
account in designing its policies. At the same time, the athletes will have to look
beyond their immediate situation into the possibilities for their future and be mindful
of their role as representations of the best of their country.
LITERATURE CITED
Anderson, B. 2003. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of
Nationalism. Anvil Press, Pasig City, Philippines, 224 p.
Blanchard, K. 2000. The Anthropology of Sport, Chapter 8, pp. 144-156. In: Coakley, J. and
E.Dunning. (Eds.). Handbook of Sports Studies. Sage, London, UK, 570 p.
Blanchard, K. and A.T. Cheska. 1985. The Anthropology of Sport: An Introduction. Bergin and
Garvey, Massachusetts, USA. 306 p.
Bulatao, J. 1992. Phenomena and their Interpretation: Landmark Essays, 1957-1989. Ateneo
Press, Quezon City, Philippines, 338 p.
Coakley, J. 2009. Sports in Society: Issues and Controversies. 10th ed., Mc-Graw-Hill, New
York, USA, 688 p.
Crowther, N. 2007. Sport in Ancient Times Praeger Publishers, Connecticut, 183 p.
Elias, N. 1986. The Genesis of Sport in Antiquity, pp. 161-186. In: On Civilization, Power
and Knowledge. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, USA. As cited in Crowther,
N. 2007. Sport in Ancient Times, Praeger Publishers, Connecticut, USA,183 p.
Foucoult, M. 1977, 1995 (2nd ed.). Discipline and Punish. Vintage Press, New York, USA,
352 p.
Guttmann, A. 2004. From Ritual to Record: The Nature of Modern Sports. Columbia University
Press, New York, USA, 224 p. As cited in Crowther, N. 2007. Sport in Ancient Times.
Praeger Publishers, Connecticut, USA, 183 p.
Jocano, F.L. 1997. Filipino Value System: A Cultural Definition. Punlad Research House,
Quezon City, Philippines, 123 p.
Jocano, F.L. 2003.1973. Folk Medicine in a Philippine Municipality. Punlad Research House,
Quezon City, Philippines, 263 p.
Jocano, F.L. 1999. Management by Culture: Fine-Tuning Modern Management to Filipino
Culture. Punlad Research House,Quezon City, Philippines, 142 p.
Kenyon, G. 1969. Sport Involvement: A Conceptual Go and Some Consequences Thereof,
In: John Loy, Gerald Kenyon and Barry McPherson. 1981. Sport, Culture and Society: A
Reader on the Sociology of Sport. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger.
Kretchmar, R.S. 1975. From Test to Contest: An Analysis of Two Kinds of Counterpoint
in Sport, pp. 36-41. In: Morgan, W.J. and K.V. Meier. (Eds.). 1995 (2nd ed.). Philosophic
Inquiry in Sport. Human Kinetics, Champaign, Illinois, USA, 448 p.
Lock, M. and N. Scheper-Hughes. 1987. The Mindful Body, A Prolegomenon to Future Work
in Medical Anthropology, pp. 347-368. In: Van der Geest and A. Rienks. (Eds.). 1998. The
Art of Medical Anthropology. Het Spinhuis, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 421 p.
Loy, J.W. (1968). The Nature of Sport: A Definitional Effort, pp. 23-32. In: Loy, J.W., G.S.
Kenyon and B.D. McPherson. 1981. Sport, Culture and Society: A Reader on the Sociology
of Sport. 2nd ed., Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia, Pensylvania, USA, 376 p.
McComb, D.G. 2004. Sports in World History. Routledge, New York, 121 p.
McClelland, J. 2007. Body and Mind: Sport in Europe from the Roman Empire to the
Renaissance. Taylor and Francis e-Library, USA, 187 p.
Peneyra, R.U. 2007. Concepts of Sport According to Elite Filipino Athletes. Master’s Thesis.
University of the Philippines Diliman, Quezon City, 37 p. (unpublished)
Philippine Sports Commission. No date. Philippine Sports Commission Legal Mandate.
http://www.psc.gov.ph/Legal%20Mandate/1987%20Philippine%20Constitution.pdf.
Retrieved June 15, 2011.
Philippine Sports Commission. No date. Logical Framework. http://www.dbm.gov.ph/
OPIF2011/OEO/PSC.pd. Retrieved June 15, 2011.