TRAMPLED AUTONOMYAuthor(s): Sylvia Burrow

Source: International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics , Vol. 9, No. 2, See

How She Runs: Feminists Rethink Fitness (FALL 2016), pp. 67-91
Published by: University of Toronto Press

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/90012239

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/90012239?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

University of Toronto Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access
to International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
TRAMPLED AUTONOMY:
WOMEN, ATHLETICISM, AND HEALTH
SYLVIA BURROW

Abstract
Philosophical analysis has paid scant attention to the gender inequalities women
athletes face compared to the myriad ways in which social science shows that
athleticism values masculinity and devalues femininity. Athletic endeavors
diverging from gendered norms are sexualized, feminized, devalued, and dele-
gitimized. A philosophical analysis reveals deep and serious double binds con-
straining women’s autonomy to engage and succeed in sport and thus to
participate in a major social institution granting status and recognition. More
importantly, these constraints to autonomy undermine women’s choices to
promote and preserve health.
Keywords: Feminine athletes, feminine sport, philosophy of sport, gender in sport,
gendered autonomy

1. Introduction

Sport is recognized both in sport studies (Kristiansen et al. 2014; Jun

and Kyle 2012; Chapman 2004; Krane 2001; McCree 2011) and in the social
sciences (Messner 1988; Cunningham and Sagas 2008; Fink 2008; Bremner 2002)
as a social institution forming, reinforcing, and perpetuating male hegemony.
They recognize the constraints, barriers, and harms to women arising from

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FEMINIST APPROACHES TO BIOETHICS Vol. 9, No. 2 (FALL 2016). 6 2016

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
68 International Journal OF FEMINIST APPROACHES TO Bioethics 9:2

current gendered social structures but cannot be expected to advance philo-

sophical implications. Yet, the latter requires attention since sport not only
mirrors but appears to magnify oppressive gendered practices. This article
hopes to meet that need through a feminist philosophical analysis that reveals
significant barriers, frustrations, and limits women athletes negotiate in sport.
I limit the focus of this article to women pursuing sport and not fitness more
broadly construed because my aim is to draw philosophical attention to a
major social institution arguably just as significant as any other to opportunities
for economic, social, and political success. While we might question whether
certain athletic pursuits such as dance or martial arts constitute sport, I include
such athletic pursuits for the purposes of this discussion since these activities
seem governed by the same sorts of institutionally entrenched biases seen in
sport. I am not proposing a new categorization of activities counting as sport
but suppose that ideals and values limiting women’s opportunities in sport
apply to any athletic pursuit governed by institutional organizations.
The feminist worry is that women avoid or leave participation in sport
in favor of less structured, less recognized forms of exercise or forgo exercise
altogether because of harmful biases and prejudices. The related health con-
cern is that a lack of exercise undercuts an important avenue for improved
health and well-being. One cannot ignore the volume of research in recent
years correlating regular physical activity with good health outcomes such as
improved mental health (Kim et al. 2012; Gopinath et al. 2012; Berg et al.
2015) and improved self-rated health (Blair and Church 2004; Bauman 2004;
Abu-Omar et al. 2004; Bassuk and Manson 2005; Södergren et al. 2008; Galán
et al. 2010). Despite this research and despite mounting evidence that not
exercising carries negative health consequences (Brustad et al. 2001), many
people choose not to exercise. Sport involvement provides a socially structured
and supported means of pursuing exercise. For those women who choose to
engage in sport, pursuit of athletic endeavors demands strategic negotiation
and compromise. My aim is to show that women pursuing sport are con-
strained by double binds limiting choice formation and pursuit. I begin in
section 2 by pointing out how femininity is opposed to sport’s hegemonic
masculine ideals and values, showing that the structure of sport is the tip of
the iceberg since women are devalued, diminished, trivialized, and delegitimized
as athletes through a deeply embedded gendering of sport. Section 3 sketches
out impaired live options more directly connected to gender bias and discrim-
ination. Section 4 then points to women’s negotiation of gender prejudices and

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SYLVIA BURROW 69

biases that dominate sport and that are connected to serious consequences for
health and well-being. The philosophical point is that impaired live options for
participating and succeeding in sport undermine women’s autonomy. Two
broad implications are that women have less opportunity for membership
in a key social institution and are thereby socially subordinated and that
impaired options reduce women’s possibilities for improved health.

2. Femininity is opposed to athleticism

The main premise of this article is that valuing masculine traits and
devaluing feminine traits of individuals and types of sport is inescapably em-
bedded in the institution of sport. Assumptions, biases, and prejudices cascade
from this value position. Femininity and masculinity are socially constructed
as binary opposites through values, beliefs, and attitudes entrenched in social
institutions. Sport discourse reinforces this social construction of gender by
supposing both that biological sex neatly divides into two and that gender
categories perfectly align with such a division. Feminist theorists have long
established compelling arguments against such loose assumptions, most notably
Sally Haslanger’s (2000) outstanding critique of the identification of gender with
sex and Anne Fausto-Sterling’s (1993) resounding rejection of the bifurcation
of sex categories. Nevertheless, the identification of sex and gender persists in
sport with deeply problematic outcomes for women and queer, transgender, and
intersex persons. This misplaced identification is implicated in several con-
straining double binds women in sport encounter, which this article outlines
in several broad strokes. My plan is to show that paradigms of athleticism
value masculinity in their requirements for excellence (such as power, contact,
and competition) and thereby limit women’s options for participation and
success in athletic pursuits.
Social norms and values suppose that the excellent athlete is paradigma-
tically a man. Sport is dominated by men in participation, administration,
refereeing, and coaching to form a space masculinizing sport through asso-
ciating it with aggression, strength, dominance, and violence (Hardy 2015).
Hegemonic masculinity further includes the devaluation of women, sanctioned
use of aggression, use of social isolation, infliction of pain, and marginalization
of nonheterosexuals (Johnson 2002). Some advance further claims that sport is
masculine because of its structure (Messner 1988; Clasen 2001) or functions as

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
70 International Journal OF FEMINIST APPROACHES TO Bioethics 9:2

a form of masculine formation and validation (Dubbert 1979; Dunning 1986).

For the purposes of this article, I follow the convention in sport literature of
using masculine sport to refer to the above description and feminine sport to
refer to clear deviations from the masculine model (see Koivula 2001). Many
sports are defined as feminine sports because women comprise the majority of
participants, such as gymnastics (78 percent), dance (98 percent), and figure
skating (71 percent) (Chalabaev et al. 2013). However, more than the mere
presence of women makes a sport feminine. Feminine sport typically appre-
ciates individual rather than team performance and emphasizes bodily beauty
in performance (Alley and Hicks 2005). Correspondingly, we see that athleticism
in feminine sport values qualities of the individual such as suppleness, flexibility,
balance, and elegance. These individual qualities form the basis of excellence
and success: feminine sport awards performances conveying feminine charac-
teristics such as expressivity, grace, or aesthetic beauty (Hardin and Greer
2009). Thus, the structure of feminine sport differs from masculine sport and,
along with it, paradigms of excellence. Women are permitted to flourish as
excellent athletes, but success is tightly circumscribed by established standards
and values about femininity.
Women’s participation in feminine sport is trivialized both through devalu-
ing the sport and devaluing athletes. Feminine sports such as cheerleading,
rhythmic gymnastics, and twirling are typically diminished in value. Supposedly,
such pursuits demand flexibility and coordination, neither of which fits the
masculine model of athletic excellence. At other times, feminine sports are
devalued as not the ‘‘real’’ versions of the actual sport. Softball is the lesser
version of baseball, ringette is the feminized version of ice hockey, and so
forth. Women’s divisions of sport are similarly devalued as lesser versions
of men’s divisions, which are understood as the default for the sport. The
WNBA (Women’s National Basketball Association) and the LPGA (Ladies
Professional Golf Association) are two of sports’ most prominent women’s
divisions. Each is denied equal status to the NBA (National Basketball Asso-
ciation) and the PGA (Professional Golf Association) in media coverage,
corporate sponsorship, and ticket sales. Even at the amateur level, women’s
divisions are often accorded club rather than varsity status and receive less
promotion and financial support. On the whole, women’s sport receives signif-
icantly less media coverage, fewer endorsement deals, and less sponsorship
than men’s sport (Lindner 2012).

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SYLVIA BURROW 71

Women are further devalued as athletes in feminine sports when these

sports move the focus from athletic prowess to the individual’s beauty or
appearance. Appearance is a regular focus both in and out of women’s sport
participation, usually overshadowing any discussion of skill, endurance, or
technical ability. A great deal of research documents such sexist sports coverage
in the media (Hardy 2015). References to women center not on power or skill
but on attractiveness or grace, and overwhelmingly rely on infantilizing or
sexualizing language such as ‘‘girls,’’ ‘‘ladies,’’ ‘‘America’s next sweetheart,’’ or
‘‘tennis’s next pin-up girl,’’ often in conjunction with diminutive first name
references (Bernstein 2002). Feminine traits such as beauty, grace, passivity,
emotionality (except anger or hostility), dependency, compassion, gentleness,
and cooperation are emphasized aspects of feminine sport. In public perfor-
mance, women appear adorned with makeup and carefully designed dresses for
ballet competition, gracefully tread water with bright smiles in synchronized
swimming, and lightly dance across the floor for ribbon twirling. Figure skaters
perform athletically complex moves but receive a great deal of commentary
concerning their gracefulness, coordination, and elegance. Even in pairs figure
skating women are dependent on men to lift them into the air or to swing
them around while they remain cooperatively in a passive position. Remaining
in a static position at another’s control is athletically challenging, especially
when moving between static positions, but this aspect of athleticism receives
little recognition. Instead, the focus is on the spectacle of a woman perched
atop a man’s hand as a calm and beautiful display in juxtaposition to his
athletic prowess as a strong and muscular support.
As participants in masculine sport, women are subject to derision for
foolishly hoping to attain goals unreachable except by men. Note that the
sport is commended, but the women participants are devalued or their skills
diminished. ‘‘Throwing like a girl’’ implies a weak or ineffective technique,
and this attitude that women will underperform is found across any sport
identified as masculine (Young 2005). Even in the most masculine of sports
such as wrestling, weightlifting, and martial arts, women are subject to mocking
and a questioning of their ability to perform. Feminist researchers have argued
that women’s participation in such traditionally male sports has not been taken
seriously and has largely been hidden from history (Halbert 1997; Hargreaves
2000; Kavoura et al. 2012). Consider martial arts. Karate, kung fu, tae kwon
do, judo, jujitsu, and many other forms of martial arts train individuals in
self-defense techniques at varying levels of intensity to subdue or immobilize

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
72 International Journal OF FEMINIST APPROACHES TO Bioethics 9:2

attackers through the application of holds, throws, or locks. Often included are
techniques to dislocate joints, break bones, render assailants unconscious, or
generate more serious consequences. These techniques are taught at varying
levels over several years to individuals displaying appropriate character traits
demonstrating responsibility and understanding of when and how to apply
serious techniques. Succeeding and advancing in such training requires an
enormous amount of dedication and very precise training. Yet, women in
martial arts are challenged by those outside the sport who frankly disbelieve
women can perform effective takedowns, locks, throws, punches, or kicks.
These stereotypes are remarkable considering that martial arts rely on technique
rather than power and thus have very little to do with size or sheer muscle
strength.
Resistance against devaluing and diminishing women’s participation in
sport challenges gender lines. Thus far, I have discussed gender as a binary,
paralleling its social construction. Yet, women in sport have managed to drive
a wedge between these opposing categories so that gender in sport can be
identified as residing on a continuum between masculinity and femininity.
Thus, we might consider golf, diving, running, and tennis as deviating from
masculine ideals and values in sport while not completely embracing femininity.
Such sports are now regarded as ‘‘gender neutral,’’ but not necessarily uniformly.
For instance, basketball is assessed as both masculine (Hardin and Greer 2009;
Matteo 1988; Chalabaev et al. 2013) and gender neutral (Koivula 1999, 2001).
I maintain that sport is anything but neutral about gender. Instead, trivializing
and devaluing women in sport appears to track a gender continuum. The
more feminine a sport is, the more it and its women participants are devalued.
The more masculine a sport is, the more it is revered, but the harder it is
for participating women to be taken seriously. Below, I briefly identify how
women challenge this double bind through changing the gendered landscape
of more masculine sports. The point is to draw out the feminist philosophical
view that women can avoid bias and prejudice associated with more feminine
sports and thus carve out subversive spaces for performing gender. At the same
time, subverting femininity comes at serious costs women must negotiate as
part of penetrating an entrenched social institution privileging masculinity.
Below, I illustrate subversiveness in the case of both amateur and professional
sport, expanding on forms of negotiation in the following section.
In amateur sport, women can subversively shift gender lines through
creating new sports or transforming current ones by outwardly defying and

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SYLVIA BURROW 73

subverting traditional gender norms. Roller derby illustrates the creation of a

new sport challenging gender lines. We can consider it a new sport because, in
its recent form, it is far different from its early inception as a complex version
of roller skating (Sailors 2013). This (currently) amateur league is a woman
dominated sport with a typical uniform consisting of a hockey jersey plus fish-
net stockings, skirts, and shin pads. Roller derby subverts femininity through
not just a subculture of body piercings and tattoos, but importantly also
through the sport’s tough contact, aggression, and force. Similar moves in other
sports see women rejecting feminine forms of comportment (such as passivity,
submissiveness, and docility) by engaging in aggressive, powerful, and forceful
techniques as sport requirements. Not restricting movement because of femi-
nine clothing or comportment opens rewards associated with full use of bodily
capacities. These rewards often extend beyond immediate athletic ability and
expertise. Women enjoying more aggressive aspects of many forms of athletics
are free to enjoy associated benefits that include reduced fear, improved self-
confidence, and a sense of perseverance (Fletcher and Milton 2009). We see
this in women in martial arts who embrace competitiveness, power, and athletic
prowess, which are associated with improved self-respect, self-confidence, and
self-esteem (Burrow 2012; Noel 2009). However, these associated benefits
may be muted through additional performances of femininity, described as
the ‘‘feminine apologetic.’’ The feminine apologetic describes the adoption of
feminine traits to counter masculine aspects of sport participation as a means
of apologizing for violating masculine norms (Hardy 2015; Bernstein 2002).
Women’s participation in aggressive, competitive sports generally is accom-
panied by apologetic behaviors outside of the sport (Hargreaves 1985; Adams
et al. 2005). Apology includes adopting feminine adornments, subordinating
lesbian athletes, and minimizing athleticism or athletic achievements (Davis-
Delano et al. 2009). Some sports see the feminine apologetic woven into the
sport. Roller derby tempers its subversiveness through a feminine apologetic
minimizing its aggressive and competitive elements by emphasizing overtly
feminine elements. Self-described ‘‘rollergirls’’ adopt derby personas with campy,
self-mocking player names, over-the-top performances, sexualized self-references,
and overtly feminine forms of dress (Becker 2009). Women who challenge
masculinity within sport have limited success in changing gender roles if they
compensate (or overcompensate) through emphasizing a highly sexualized
femininity. Further, challenging gender roles in sport can be undermined by

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
74 International Journal OF FEMINIST APPROACHES TO Bioethics 9:2

external forms of resistance. As roller derby becomes more popular and com-
mercial interests become more prominent, it receives more pressure to include
men and risks losing its subversiveness and, ultimately, women’s challenge to
masculine values in sport (Sailors 2013).
In professional sport, stellar women athletes can transform gendered
stereotypes through influencing the sorts of skills valued in the sport or asso-
ciated with a particular gender. Tennis was established as a masculine sport
and banned women from top tier competition in its early years. In the decades
since women have competed in their own division, the Williams sisters stand
out as challengers to tennis’s gendered landscape by demonstrating a consistent
dominating power and force not seen in the men’s game (Kimmelman 2010).
Men’s tennis focuses on powerful serves as a means of overpowering opponents.
This results in a fairly predictable game with a limited number of rallies and
little finesse or variation. Women’s tennis sees longer rallies showing greater
expertise and variation in strokes. Women players work mainly from the base-
line, resulting in longer volleys that do not match the sheer speed of power
serves and thus allowing spectators to appreciate better the skillfully crafted
strokes. Serena and Venus Williams disrupt this style of play by demonstrating
a power and domination in their serves, thus shifting focus away from the volleys
typically associated with the women’s game. Therefore, the Williams sisters
upset typical gendered assumptions about the sport while also changing which
skills are valued in women’s tennis. But, at the same time, an intersectional
perspective raises doubt as to whether tennis will see any long-term change
in its gendering owing to deeply connected biases. Depictions of the Williams
sisters in the media reflect interconnected racial and socioeconomic biases.
John Vincent (2004) shows that the superior standing of both sisters is dis-
missed in essentialist terms as the result of ‘‘natural’’ black athleticism, which
denies excellence in traits such as intelligence, discipline, and tactical judg-
ment. Furthermore, ‘‘poor girl makes good’’ commentaries reflect racial and
socioeconomic prejudice in descriptions of their training beginning on the
potholed courts of ‘‘the ghetto.’’ Key facts are omitted to make this oppressive
stereotype work, such as the point that the sisters received much of their train-
ing through scholarships at an elite Florida tennis academy. The upshot is that
these interconnected biases suggest that the way in which the Williams sisters
have changed tennis may simply be dismissed as an anomaly once they have
retired from the professional circuit.

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SYLVIA BURROW 75

Devaluing women through an assortment of feminine and masculine biases

in sport is linked to diminished choices to participate and flourish as athletes.
Women have been denied various forms of participation in the Olympics,
beginning with zero representation of women in its modern incarnation in
1896 (Bernstein 2002). By 2012, the Summer Olympic Games saw women’s
competition in boxing and thus women’s possibility to compete in every divi-
sion (McCree 2011). At present, women are only denied competition in the
Winter Olympics’ Nordic Combined (cross country skiing plus ski jumping,
either of which women may compete in individually). Getting to the Olympics
requires extra effort for women because limited access to training or certain
competition conditions diminish their ability to excel. Advancing to the Olympics
or professional leagues relies on a strong base developed through amateur
training and competition. But development at amateur levels is less easily
available to women, who are denied the same training opportunities as men
and thus need to overcome obstacles interfering with the ability to excel at
beginning levels. In general, women’s amateur teams receive less funding and
less promotion, and women receive fewer athletic scholarships than men
(Hoeber 2007). Those advancing to some of the highest levels in sport still
face restricted conditions. Women competing at the upcoming FIFA (Fédération
Internationale de Football Association) World Cup in 2016 will compete on
artificial turf in noticeable juxtaposition to the men, who are promised superior
natural grass. Sponsorship, ticket sales, and other financial sources of access
to training and competition are attached to media coverage, but the media’s
recognition of women athletes at professional levels is remarkably lower than
it is for men: women athletes receive approximately 4 percent of overall media
coverage in masculine sports, rising to 24 percent coverage in more feminine
sports (Koivula 1999). Women are routinely discouraged and actively prevented
from participating in sport at all levels, including in which sports they can
participate, how they are judged, and what funding they receive (Schneider
2000). Why are women so consistently diminished and devalued in sport?
The main reason women are subordinated as athletes appears to be that
women are considered weaker than men. Here, sport echoes a commonly held
view aligning it with all other social institutions oppressive to women, namely,
that women are lesser than men. In the case of sport, it is sheer prejudice to
assume women are weaker than men. Granted, plenty of empirical research
asserts that men perform better than women in motor skills requiring strength
and speed (Chalabaev et al. 2013). Thus, we see such assertions as ‘‘In sprinting,

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
76 International Journal OF FEMINIST APPROACHES TO Bioethics 9:2

rowing and swimming, men perform at levels far beyond women, although both
groups use the same equipment and training methods, and both groups work
equally hard at their training. Men are larger, stronger and faster’’ (Foddy and
Savulescu 2011, 1185). However, the conclusion does not follow. On average,
women have a lower strength to weight ratio than men, but this is altered
through athletic training. Accomplished women in sport perform better than
98 percent of the general male population (Chapman 2004). Thus, it is not
correct that men are always athletically superior to women. Nor are they athlet-
ically superior in any given sport. Athletic pursuits requiring calmness, con-
centration, or accuracy are illustrative. Martial artists are capable of mastering
calm, effective, and precisely executed techniques. Women and men are com-
parable here in ability and often train together, performing the same repertoire
of self-defense techniques with comparable effectiveness. Indeed, the ability to
succeed in martial arts training seems indistinguishable between women and
men, justifying an elimination of gender divisions even at the highest levels of
competition (Chapman 2004). In other sports, women can compete with men
at the highest levels and win top medals. When skeet competition categories
included both men and women, it was a woman who won Olympic gold,
and, in the shooting division of the biathlon, women regularly outperform
men (Chalabaev et al. 2013). In endurance activities, men and women meet
similar targets, but here women consistently outperform men, for example, in
marathon running and swimming (Nelson 1994). It is particularly notable that
running and swimming both require the same athletic skill sets, yet women
are at no disadvantage. Overall, no evidence appears to justify gendered divi-
sions in sport based on ability even at recreational league levels (Bremner
2002).
Even if it were the case that men generally outperform women, it is still
logically consistent to claim that any individual woman can outperform any
man or any number of men; to claim otherwise evidences sexual discrimina-
tion (Tännsjö 2000). Gender segregation in sport simply relies on the faulty—
and discriminatory—assumption that men will always outperform women.
Acknowledging that women are quite capable of successfully competing against
men requires rethinking current divisions in sport. One option is to adopt
a more practical approach attuned to physical differences in competition
such as height, weight, or age appropriate to a sport’s competition framework.
Should that be too revolutionary, sport legislation could start with the most
minimum amount of consistency: currently, a fighter can fight above weight

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SYLVIA BURROW 77

class but not below it; an exceptional younger player can play in an older age
division; and so a (seemingly exceptional) woman should be able to participate
in the men’s division (Burke 2004). A second option is to abolish divisions
altogether and allow the course to determine the outcome. Not all sports could
permit a fair playing field with this option. But certain sports could take this
route and permit a mix of genders to compete together. Marathon running is
exemplary here as a sport permitting competition regardless of gender, height,
weight, and so forth. Women prove to be at no disadvantage and, in fact,
excel. Even with a tenfold average difference in testosterone levels between
men and women, women are on par in winning marathon times even at the
Olympic level (Davis and Edwards 2014). The upshot is that preventing women
and men from competing together is not grounded in the evidence. Recognizing
this point carries further significance to those who are intersex or transgender.
Neither possessing feminine traits nor having female anatomy should imme-
diately prove a barrier to competition among a plurality of genders except as
a result of discriminatory practice.

3. Impaired live options

A successful woman athlete is subject to prejudice and bias undermining

her participation in any given sport through limited practical choices or live
options. Two main approaches stand out as overt forms of challenging women’s
participation. Both regard successful women athletes as deviants. First, women
excelling as athletes are often labeled as queer, regardless of their actual sexual
identity, and are thereby subject to heterosexist discrimination. Second, women
can be considered so deviant that they are disputed as legitimate participants
in their gender division, deserving disqualification for masquerading as women.
Each interferes with women’s routes to success from baldly discouraging to
directly preventing competition. Both evidence discrimination and impair
women’s options for choosing forms of sport participation, competition track,
and future roles (as coaches, referees, judges, and so forth). Below, I acknowl-
edge some ways in which these two forms of prejudice and bias contribute to
a sport environment undermining women’s autonomy, before I turn to a
deeper investigation of constrained options for women based on gendered
forms of sport.

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
78 International Journal OF FEMINIST APPROACHES TO Bioethics 9:2

First, let’s consider that women are subject to a hostile sport environment
on grounds that they are queer. Heterosexism deters many women from
entrance and participation in sport regardless of their actual sexual identity be-
cause initiation requires embracing heterosexual practices and comportments
within the culture of the sport (Johnson 2002). Defying norms of hetero-
sexuality sees women subject to countless harms associated with prejudices
against sexuality. Gay men can pass as heterosexual to succeed as athletes,
but women’s heterosexuality is often questioned, most noticeably if they do
not participate in feminine sport (Bremner 2002). Defying heteronormative
ideals of femininity results in a lesbian stigma subjecting such women to
prejudicial or discriminatory homophobic actions and attitudes (Knight and
Giuliano 2003). Women participating in masculine sport are further stigma-
tized as queer if they appear ‘‘too masculine’’ (Noel 2009). Thus, displays of
aggression or power demanded by certain sports for success do not accentuate
women’s sporting excellence but further entrench the lesbian stigma. However,
the problem does not end at stigmatization. Queer women or those labeled
queer are subject to sexual assault by other athletes, coaches, managers, and
others at a level far more pronounced than for other women (Nelson 1994). To
avoid harms associated with stigmatization, many women accentuate femininity
and hide masculine traits. Women then may withhold displays of aggression in
athletic participation, maintain long hair, or wear tight, constricting clothing
accentuating femininity—any of which can hamper athletic performance
(Lorber 1993). Even if athletic performance is not directly diminished, aiming
to avoid homophobic prejudice or assault through performing femininity is no
guarantee against prejudices and assaults directed against athletes as women
(as we see in the next section).
Second, women may manage to navigate participation in sport to avoid
heterosexist harms or stigmatization but may suffer reduced options to com-
pete while tests ascertain if they are actually women. In 2009, Caster Semenya,
a South African woman, burst on the scene in the African Junior Champion-
ships with a stellar running time and quickly went on to win gold at the world
championships and silver at the Olympic Games. However, her ability to
compete was suspended between 2009 and 2010 while the International Asso-
ciation of Athletic Federations performed drug tests and ‘‘gender tests.’’ Gender
tests are not actually tests of gender, which would require an analysis of
behavior, comportment, attire, language, and so on, contextually understood

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SYLVIA BURROW 79

within a certain society. Instead, these tests rely on sex testing, or testing bio-
logical features to ascertain if a person is a female or male. We have already
seen that equating gender with sex exemplifies bad reasoning. Yet, sex differ-
ences persist as reasons to eliminate women from competition. The common
assumption is that males are differentiated from females by the presence of
androgens, primarily testosterone; the presence of XY chromosomes; and a
plurality of physical traits, but most importantly male genitals. Sex associated
differences that seem most relevant to sport are differences in testosterone.
Bennett Foddy and Julian Savulescu (2011) assert that testosterone is primarily
responsible for the development of skeletal muscles, bones, and red blood cells,
and thus it is advantageous to athletic performance. The authors point out
that high testosterone may be present for males, females, or intersexed persons
as only one of many genetic advantages a person may have in sport competi-
tion. If sport divisions excluded those with seemingly unfair genetic advantages,
then Olympic swimmers Michael Phelps and Ian Thorpe should be excluded
(the first, because he has Marfan’s syndrome, resulting in abnormally long
arms and the second because of his extraordinary large feet) (1186). Genetic
differences simply do not justify gender divisions. Gender testing reflects the
erroneous assumptions that (1) gender is aligned with sex; (2) gender and sex
are each binary categories; and (3) women can never perform as well as men.
At this point, we are in a position to appreciate a significant double bind
limiting women’s practical options to participate in sport. For women wishing
to pursue feminine sport, bias and prejudice ensure that athletes are devalued
as participants in a sport that is devalued. The alternative is to participate in
masculine or less clearly feminine sports. Doing so opens women to bias and
prejudice as queer women (regardless of actual sexual identification) or inter-
rupts (or bars) training and competition owing to gender testing. The double
bind, in effect, belittles women’s value as participants in sport while delegiti-
mizing feminine sport. Such devaluing is reinforced by competition categories
that eliminate women’s opportunities for proving athletic excellence against
men. Dividing competition categories according to gender simply reinforces
the prejudicial view that women are weaker than men. The following section
expands on the trivializing and devaluing of women through examining
attached threats and harms demanding negotiation to participate and excel
in sport.

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
80 International Journal OF FEMINIST APPROACHES TO Bioethics 9:2

4. Negotiating double binds

Despite obstacles, women continue to excel as athletes and have forced

the structure of sport to include them at all levels where previously denied.
How do women surge beyond barriers and limits to participation and success?
I suggest that negotiation is key to their success as athletes and that forms of
negotiation differ according to what’s at stake, which varies according to
gendered ideals and values. Negotiation itself reveals constrained live options.
At stake is women’s ability to promote and preserve health as flourishing
athletic participants, or so I hope to show through considering masculine and
feminine sport as either end of a gendered continuum.
In feminine sport, gendered expectations are clearly defined along social
norms and values encouraging conformity. Heteronormative standards of
femininity define body ideals, comportment, and attire suitable for women
athletes. To succeed as athletes, women must succeed at performing femininity.
Thus, it might seem that women in feminine sport have little to negotiate. This
is incorrect for two reasons. First, women must negotiate to flourish in perform-
ing femininity as athletes. Women implicitly contradict masculine values and
ideals by endorsing femininity. To succeed, women in feminine sport must
negotiate masculine ideals and values upheld by coaches, judges, referees, and
other figures with institutional authority, most of them men. This has not
always been the case. Hums et al. (1999) note that, twenty-plus years after
Title IX was introduced in the United States, the number of men in authority
saw a dramatic increase. Whereas over 90 percent of coaches for women’s
teams and over 90 percent of head administrators of women’s programs were
women in 1972, by 1994 those numbers shifted to 49 percent and 20 percent,
respectively. A further longitudinal study from 1977 to 2014 shows that
women’s positions as program directors and head coaches have continued to
decline precipitously (Carpenter and Acosta 2014). In addition to the dominant
presence of men over women, masculine traits are valued in athlete coaching,
which has a negative effect on feminine athletes. Kavoura et al. (2012) point
to verbal abuse, indifference, and conflict as defining coaching styles valuing
masculine aggression, remarking that women develop complacent and con-
ciliatory positions within this environment so as to acquire the skills and
training necessary to excel. Since succeeding in feminine sport relies on
endorsing a great deal of feminine traits, we can assume that these athletes
endorse traditional feminine traits such as passivity, docility, agreeableness,

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SYLVIA BURROW 81

cooperation, and so forth. Furthermore, we can expect these attitudes to

appear in athletes engaged in more masculine sports if women cannot ques-
tion coaches’ authority and must instead negotiate by employing a variety of
diplomatic strategies to achieve performance goals.
Second, women in traditionally feminine sports negotiate gender ideals
and values in light of health consequences. Women are faced with a series of
contradictions defining the athletic aesthetic, which forms the dominant narra-
tive of femininity in sport: thin yet curvaceous, toned but not muscular, strong
and yet graceful (Rauscher et al. 2013). A focus on bodily appearance is
embedded in feminine sport under the guise of aesthetically pleasing forms
of grace and beauty, both of which appear to necessitate an exceptionally
lean, light body. A focus on body size and appearance encourages appearance
comparison, which tends to lower body image satisfaction and increase psy-
chological disorders such as eating disorders and depression (Rauscher et al.
2013). Eating disorders are a serious concern and appear to be tightly connected
to feminine sports such as ballet and figure skating (Ravaldi et al. 2006). An
assessment of studies over a twenty year span until 2001 shows that eating dis-
orders are far more common in the case of women athletes than nonathletes
and between ten and twenty times more common for women rather than
men (Byrne and McLean 2001). Eating disorders feature as a precursor of
the common female athlete triad that Jorunn Sundgot-Borgen et al. (2013)
describe as energy deficiency, dysfunctional menstruation, and osteoporosis.
The authors further show that long-term results include chronic fatigue, in-
creased risk of infections and illnesses, stress, depression, and complications
with cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, endocrine, reproductive, skeletal, renal,
and central nervous systems. Thus, the health consequences for women per-
forming femininity as part of sport performance are sobering. Women invested
in their long-term quality of health have much to consider as part of negotiating
their degree of involvement in feminine sport, and it would be unsurprising if
many of these women lowered their performance goals or left sport altogether
to preserve their health.
Women face different challenges of negotiation in more masculine sports.
On the one hand, athletes bear costs for appearing too feminine, and, on the
other hand, they are subject to costs for not appearing feminine enough. As
we saw above, athletes appearing too feminine in a nonfeminine sport are
sexualized, trivialized, and generally taken less seriously as athletes. The con-
sequences of not appearing feminine or participating in sports not perceived

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
82 International Journal OF FEMINIST APPROACHES TO Bioethics 9:2

as feminine include negative treatment by administrators and coaches, verbal

harassment by fans, lack of media attention and endorsements, sexist and
heterosexist prejudice, and negative bias by officials or judges during competi-
tion. These consequences have been revealed in studies of female boxers, ice
hockey players, wrestlers, aerobic exercise participants, and lesbians in sport
(Krane 2001). Such athletes are devalued, sexualized, and trivialized as lesser
participants in an institution implicitly valuing masculinity and heterosexuality.
In effect, women are disrespected through sexualizing, devaluing, and trivializing
their athletic participation. One might assert that such disrespect at once dis-
respects autonomy while constituting an objectification of women (McLeod
2009). While I agree that autonomy is impaired through biases and prejudices
against women, I wish to consider how women negotiate such contested terrain
in light of the limited options available to them to flourish in sport.
Earlier, we saw that the feminine apologetic is a route allowing women
to compensate for violating gendered norms and values in sport. One might
think that this compensatory measure is a small price to pay for advancing
women beyond imposed gender limits. I suggest that the price bears serious
costs in the form of devaluing, objectifying, and trivializing women’s athleticism.
Much of this happens outside the sports arena. Women defying gender ex-
pectations in their athletic pursuits seem to receive as much or more media
coverage of their feminized bodies outside of sport as they do of their sporting
achievements. The media is complicit in developing images of women athletes
as good wives or mothers or alternatively as sexualized and objectified bodies.
Ice hockey champion Hayley Wickenheiser features in advertisements high-
lighting her role as a good mother and housewife when she provides Hamburger
Helper to her family, while Catrina LeMay Doan’s ad shows her in a full speed
skating suit while she is noticeably wearing makeup and prominently displaying
her wedding ring (Hardy 2015). Such coverage accentuates a clear heterosexuality
aiming to counter the lesbian stigma applied to excellent women athletes but
at the cost of devaluing these athletes. Neither housewives nor mothers occupy
privileged positions in society. Furthermore, commentary or images of women
performing are frequently sexualized. Consider Time magazine’s coverage of
Florence Delorez Griffith Joyner, who was ranked the fastest runner ‘‘of all
time’’ in the 1980s. The image used shows Flo Jo from behind, bent over at
her runner’s starting gate with a view between her hamstrings of her glittering
long fingernails (Nelson 1994). At the time, this image was highly provocative
(Duncan 1990). Now, media images border on soft pornography. Mixed martial

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SYLVIA BURROW 83

artist Ronda Rousey has a highly muscular body and an aggressive fighting
style and is a top world competitor but receives more media attention for her
nude, sexualized poses outside the ring, a move echoed in the case of many
successful mixed martial artist women (Weaving 2014). Similarly, photographs
of boxing champion Jizelle Salandy nude or in provocative poses equal in
number the pictures of her boxing (McCree 2011). Patricia Clasen (2001) argues
that women must face a duality as athletes owing to the feminine apologetic:
as athletes both embracing masculine traits in athletic pursuits and emphasiz-
ing femininity outside of sport. The highest athletic successes do not seem to
mitigate this. One of the most decorated Olympians in modern times, Jenny
Thompson, still appears nude in Sports Illustrated. It does not appear unusual
for women at the highest levels of success to appear nude in sexualized and
objectified forms of media (Weaving 2014; Hardy 2015).
Women must negotiate sexual assault and harassment as forms of back-
lash, and here sport is no different from other social institutions. Women, as a
group, are subject to high rates of violence, including sexual assault and rape;
thus, it should come as no surprise that women in athletics experience assault.
Jean Chrisler and Shelia Ferguson (2006) show that the number of annual
injuries and death due to violence against women is a worldwide epidemic.
They cite U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention statistics to illus-
trate the sheer numbers of assault. These statistics include the estimate that
4,450,807 women are assaulted annually by men known to them, and over
half of the assaults cause immediate observable injuries or injuries requiring
medical care, including bruises, broken bones, burns, lacerations, knife wounds,
bullet wounds, and broken teeth (Chrisler and Ferguson 2006, 237). While
intimate partner violence is the source of many of these assaults, other known
men contribute to a culture of violence against women (Burrow 2012). Men in
sport contexts commit the majority of assaults against women. An increase in
research on assault and harassment against women in sport contexts shows
that over 45 percent of women athletes experience assault from men, and 15
percent experience assault from women (Fasting et al. 2007). Sandra Kirby
et al. (2000) build on several empirical studies showing that women athletes
endure a culture of violence, fearing rape or sexual assault, sexual harassment,
child sexual assault, and physical harassment. The authors describe a thriving
sexist environment in which verbal abuse is unchecked, sexual jokes and sexual
allusions about what athletes must do to make the team are commonplace,
and a high tolerance for homophobic and sexist attitudes is common.

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
84 International Journal OF FEMINIST APPROACHES TO Bioethics 9:2

One might think that women in sport are less likely to experience assault
when participating in more masculine sports since these develop physical
dominance and assertiveness. Part of this view is correct. Sports valuing qual-
ities such as strength, power, and control can overcome women’s socialization
in vulnerability, weakness, and dependence (Noel 2009). But these same posi-
tive attributes can spur a backlash. Anger and resistance from men in superior
power positions are typical reactions to women athletes who defy typical
gender expectations (Nelson 1994). If Brian Pronger (2009) is right, the very
structure of sport is phallocentric and erotic, a place in which sexuality is
implicit and assault is rampant. In this context, sexual desire is associated
with territorializing the body, which is closely associated with violence (167).
Violence is a means of asserting power and dominance in sport; thus, women
in more masculine sports are subject to threats of violence or experience vio-
lence as a means of asserting male superiority. Women in training are also
subject to discrimination and harassment linked with physical threat or assault
disguised as sport techniques, such as hitting women boxers harder in the ring
(Krane 2001). In contrast, women in feminine sports are less likely to experience
violence from fellow participants but are more likely to experience violence and
threats of violence from men, who dominate positions of authority as coaches,
managers, and so forth (Fasting et al. 2007).
Violence against athletes is one expression of violence against women
and, as such, poses a serious health concern. Long-term health consequences
of physical or sexual abuse include dysmenorrhea, sexually transmitted diseases,
migraines, infections, gastrointestinal disorders, chronic pain, hypertension,
musculoskeletal problems, low energy, chronic fatigue, back pain, trembling
limbs, weakness, and severe aches and pains (Chrisler and Ferguson 2006,
241). Some limited studies further identify psychological distress, poor self-
perceived health, increased days in bed, and increased use of analgesics, tran-
quilizers, antidepressants, or illegal drugs (Vives-Cases et al. 2011). Experienc-
ing any of these health effects of violence is likely to interfere with athletic
participation and success. Yet, violence against women has been continually
overlooked by health care systems across the globe as a serious issue requiring
a multisystems response (Garcı́a-Moreno et al. 2015). The World Health
Organization (2013) emphasizes the urgent and worldwide need to train
health care providers in recognizing and treating both physical and sexual
assault of women. Until such changes are implemented, women will continue
to suffer from undiagnosed and untreated conditions arising from assault. We

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SYLVIA BURROW 85

can expect that, given the frequency of violence in sport, women athletes suffer
many short- and long-term health consequences of physical and sexual violence.
In light of the power and privilege of those likely to assault women athletes, we
might suspect that a drive to continue athletic pursuits promotes nondisclosure
of assault and thus the quiet suffering of a myriad of associated health problems.
What seems fairly incontestible is that women are subject to violence as part
of living in a culture of violence, and sport is no exception. Just as women
negotiate rape culture in society to flourish as individuals, women in sport
negotiate threats and harms in the pursuit of athletic excellence. Negotiation
carries costs to choice formation and pursuit. If choices are rejected, modified,
or otherwise constrained owing to a culture of violence, then autonomy is
compromised.

6. Conclusion

Women are limited in opportunities for athletic participation and success

owing to a deeply pervasive double bind that we can appreciate from a broad
perspective. It proceeds along the following lines. Pursue socially condoned
but trivialized, ignored, and devalued forms of feminine sport associated with
a myriad of health disorders, or edge into more masculine forms of sport
where both gender and sexuality are questioned, challenged, or used as the
basis for harming women or discouraging or expelling women from participa-
tion. In either case, women entering sports enter a masculine dominated insti-
tution that threatens their safety, security, and health owing to sexual and
physical assault by men. I am not suggesting that only women endure double
binds or associated threats to health and well-being. Negotiating gendered
terrain can be difficult for gay men and transgender or intersex persons, all of
whom fail to fit heterosexist stereotypes clearly and, on those grounds, can be
prevented from competing in preferred gender categories or denied com-
petition altogether. However, this article is devoted to a broad assessment of
harms and threats women in sport encounter with the purpose of indicating
how choices to participate and succeed might be mitigated or denied as live
options. And we have good reason to think women’s negotiation as athletes
results in compromised autonomy: (1) women’s options to compete can be
compromised by gender tests and heterosexist prejudices; (2) women’s choices
may be limited by threats of physical or sexual assault; and (3) women, on the

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
86 International Journal OF FEMINIST APPROACHES TO Bioethics 9:2

whole, are constrained either to participate in devalued feminine sports or to

risk harm as devalued members of more masculine sports.
Each of these illustrates harms of hegemonic masculinity, showing that
gender bias compromises women’s live options as athletes to different degrees
in the case of (1) and (2) but unavoidably compromises options in the case of
(3). I will leave the detailed analysis of effects on autonomy for future work in
the hopes that a philosophical focus on women in sport commands the serious
and sustained inquiry it deserves.

Acknowledgments
I gratefully appreciate the encouragement of Jean Harvey, Samantha Brennan,
Tracy Isaacs, and Moira Howes to pursue my writing on this topic. I am thankful to
audience participants at Dalhousie University’s Philosophy Colloquium, Cape Breton
University’s Philosophy Café, and anonymous reviewers of the Canadian Society for
Women in Philosophy conference for feedback on earlier versions of this article.

References
Abu-Omar, Karim, Alfred Rütten, and Jean-Marie Robine. 2004. ‘‘Self-Rated Health
and Physical Activity in the European Union.’’ Sozial- und Präventivmedizin
49 (4): 235–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00038-004-3107-x. Medline:15357524
Adams, Natalie, Alison Schmitke, and Amy Franklin. 2005. ‘‘Tomboys, Dykes, and
Girly Girls: Interrogating the Subjectivities of Adolescent Female Athletes.’’
Women’s Studies Quarterly 33 (1–2): 17–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/40005499
Alley, Thomas R., and Catherine M. Hicks. 2005. ‘‘Peer Attitudes towards Adolescent
Participants in Male- and Female-Oriented Sports.’’ Adolescence 40 (158): 273–
80. Medline:16114591
Bassuk, Shari S., and JoAnn E. Manson. 2005. ‘‘Epidemiological Evidence for the Role
of Physical Activity in Reducing Risk of Type 2 Diabetes and Cardiovascular
Disease.’’ Journal of Applied Physiology 99 (3): 1193–204. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1152/japplphysiol.00160.2005. Medline:16103522
Bauman, Adrian E. 2004. ‘‘Updating the Evidence That Physical Activity Is Good for
Health: An Epidemiological Review 2000–2003.’’ Journal of Science and Medicine
in Sport 7 (1 Suppl.): 6–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1440-2440(04)80273-1.
Medline:15214597
Becker, Suzanne. 2009. ‘‘Fishnets, Feminism, and Femininity: Gender and Sexuality
within Women’s Roller Derby.’’ Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
American Sociological Association, August 7–11, San Francisco, CA.
Berg, Brennan K., Stacy Warner, and Bhibha M. Das. 2015. ‘‘What about Sport? A
Public Health Perspective on Leisure-Time Physical Activity.’’ Sport Management
Review 18 (1): 20–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2014.09.005

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SYLVIA BURROW 87

Bernstein, Alina. 2002. ‘‘Is It Time for a Victory Lap? Changes in the Media Coverage
of Women in Sport.’’ International Review for the Sociology of Sport 37 (3–4):
415–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/101269020203700301
Blair, Steven N., and Tim S. Church. 2004. ‘‘The Fitness, Obesity, and Health Equa-
tion: Is Physical Activity the Common Denominator?’’ Journal of the American
Medical Association 292 (10): 1232–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.292.10.1232.
Medline:15353537
Bremner, Kyla. 2002. ‘‘Gender, Sport, and Sexuality.’’ Canadian Women’s Studies 21 (3):
6–11.
Brustad, Robert, Megan Babkes, and Alan Smith. 2001. ‘‘Youth in Sport: Psychological
Considerations.’’ In Handbook of Sport Psychology, 2nd ed., ed. Robert N. Singer,
Heather Hausenblas, and Christopher Janelle, 604–35. New York: John Wiley &
Sons.
Burke, Michael. 2004. ‘‘Radicalising Liberal Feminism by Playing the Games That Men
Play.’’ Australian Feminist Studies 19 (44): 169–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
0816464042000226465
Burrow, Sylvia. 2012. ‘‘Protecting One’s Commitments: Integrity and Self-Defence.’’
International Journal of Applied Philosophy 26 (1): 49–66. http://dx.doi.org/
10.5840/ijap20122615
Byrne, Susan, and Neil McLean. 2001. ‘‘Eating Disorders in Athletes: A Review of
the Literature.’’ Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 4 (2): 145–59. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1440-2440(01)80025-6. Medline:11548914
Carpenter, Linda Jean, and R. Vivian Acosta. 2014. ‘‘Women in Intercollegiate Sport:
A Longitudinal, National Study, Thirty Seven Year Update, 1977–2014.’’ http://
www.acostacarpenter.org/2014%20Status%20of%20Women%20in%20Intercolle-
giate%20Sport%20-37%20Year%20Update%20-%201977-2014%20.pdf
Chalabaev, Aı̈na, Philippe Sarrazin, Paul Fontayne, Julie Boiché, and Corentin Clément-
Guillotin. 2013. ‘‘The Influence of Sex Stereotypes and Gender Roles on Partici-
pation and Performance in Sport and Exercise: Review and Future Directions.’’
Psychology of Sport and Exercise 14 (2): 136–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
psychsport.2012.10.005
Chapman, Kris. 2004. ‘‘Ossu! Sporting Masculinities in a Japanese Karate Do#jo#.’’ Japan
Forum 16 (2): 315–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0955580042000222709
Chrisler, Joan C., and Sheila Ferguson. 2006. ‘‘Violence against Women as a Public
Health Issue.’’ Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1087 (1): 235–49.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1196/annals.1385.009. Medline:17189508
Clasen, Patricia R. W. 2001. ‘‘The Female Athlete: Dualisms and Paradox in Practice.’’
Women & Language 24 (2): 36–41.
Cunningham, George B., and Michael Sagas. 2008. ‘‘Gender and Sex Diversity in Sport
Organizations: Introduction to a Special Issue.’’ Sex Roles 58 (1–2): 3–9. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11199-007-9360-8
Davis, Paul, and Lisa Edwards. 2014. ‘‘The New IOC and IAAF Policies on Female
Eligibility: Old Emperor, New Clothes?’’ Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 8 (1): 44–
56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17511321.2014.899613

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
88 International Journal OF FEMINIST APPROACHES TO Bioethics 9:2

Davis-Delano, Laurel R., April Pollock, and Jennifer Ellsworth Vose. 2009. ‘‘Apologetic
Behavior among Female Athletes: A New Questionnaire and Initial Results.’’
International Review for the Sociology of Sport 44 (2–3): 131–50. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1177/1012690209335524
Dubbert, Joe. 1979. A Man’s Place: Masculinity in Transition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Duncan, Margaret Carlisle. 1990. ‘‘Sports Photographs and Sexual Difference: Images
of Women and Men in the 1984 and 1988 Olympic Games.’’ Sociology of Sport
Journal 7 (1): 22–43.
Dunning, Eric. 1986. ‘‘Sport as a Male Preserve: Notes on the Social Sources of Masculine
Identity and Its Transformations.’’ Theory, Culture & Society 3 (1): 79–90. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1177/0263276486003001007
Fasting, Kari, Celia Brackenridge, and Kristin Walseth. 2007. ‘‘Women Athletes’
Personal Responses to Sexual Harassment in Sport.’’ Journal of Applied Sport
Psychology 19 (4): 419–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10413200701599165
Fausto-Sterling, Anne. 1993. ‘‘The Five Sexes: Why Male and Female Are Not Enough.’’
Sciences 33 (March/April): 20–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2326-1951.1993.tb03081.x
Fink, Janet S. 2008. ‘‘Gender and Sex Diversity in Sport Organizations: Concluding
Comments.’’ Sex Roles 58 (1–2): 146–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11199-007-
9364-4
Fletcher, Roly, and Martin Milton. 2009. ‘‘Being Aggressive: An Interpretative Phenom-
enological Analysis of Kung Fu Practitioners’ Experience of Aggression.’’ Existen-
tial Analysis 20 (1): 20–34.
Foddy, Bennett, and Julian Savulescu. 2011. ‘‘Time to Re-Evaluate Gender Segregation
in Athletics?’’ British Journal of Sports Medicine 45 (15): 1184–88. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.2010.071639. Medline:20702382
Galán, Iñaki, Carmen M. Meseguer, Rafael Herruzo, and Fernando Rodrı́guez-Artalejo.
2010. ‘‘Self-Rated Health According to Amount, Intensity and Duration of Leisure
Time Physical Activity.’’ Preventive Medicine 51 (5): 378–83. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.ypmed.2010.09.001. Medline:20832418
Garcı́a-Moreno, Claudia, Kelsey Hegarty, Ana Flavia Lucas d’Oliveira, et al. 2015. ‘‘The
Health-Systems Response to Violence against Women.’’ Lancet 385 (9977):
1567–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61837-7. Medline:25467583
Gopinath, Bamini, Louise L. Hardy, Louise A. Baur, George Burlutsky, and Paul Mitchell.
2012. ‘‘Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviors and Health-Related Quality of
Life in Adolescents.’’ Pediatrics 130 (1): e167–e174. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/
peds.2011-3637. Medline:22689863
Halbert, Christy. 1997. ‘‘Tough Enough and Woman Enough: Stereotypes, Discrimination,
and Impression Management among Women Professional Boxers.’’ Journal of Sport
and Social Issues 21 (1): 7–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/019372397021001002
Hardin, Marie, and Jennifer Greer. 2009. ‘‘The Influence of Gender-Role Socialization,
Media Use and Sports Participation on Perceptions of Gender-Appropriate
Sports.’’ Journal of Sport Behavior 32 (2): 207–26.

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SYLVIA BURROW 89

Hardy, Elizabeth. 2015. ‘‘The Female ‘Apologetic’ Behaviour within Canadian Women’s
Rugby: Athlete Perceptions and Media Influences.’’ Sport in Society 18 (2): 155–
67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2013.854515
Hargreaves, Jennifer. 1985. ‘‘‘Playing Like Gentlemen While Behaving Like Ladies’:
Contradictory Features of the Formative Years of Women’s Sport.’’ British Journal
of Sports History 2 (1): 40–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02649378508713562
——. 2000. Heroines of Sport: The Politics of Difference and Identity. New York:
Routledge.
Haslanger, Sally. 2000. ‘‘Gender and Race: (What) Are They? (What) Do We Want
Them to Be?’’ Noûs 34 (1): 31–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0029-4624.00201
Hoeber, Larena. 2007. ‘‘Exploring the Gaps between Meanings and Practices of Gender
Equity in a Sport Organization.’’ Gender, Work and Organization 14 (3): 259–80.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2007.00342.x
Hums, Mary A., Carol A. Barr, and Laurie Gullion. 1999. ‘‘The Ethical Issues Confront-
ing Managers in the Sport Industry.’’ Journal of Business Ethics 20 (1): 51–66.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1005951720456
Johnson, Jay. 2002. ‘‘Are Sisters Doing It for Themselves? An Analysis of Gender and
the Sport Initiation Ceremony.’’ Canadian Women’s Studies 21 (3): 125–31.
Jun, Jinhee, and Gerard T. Kyle. 2012. ‘‘Gender Identity, Leisure Identity, and Leisure
Participation.’’ Journal of Leisure Research 44 (3): 353–78.
Kavoura, Anna, Tatiana Ryba, and Marja Kokkonen. 2012. ‘‘Psychological Research on
Martial Artists: A Critical View from a Cultural Praxis Framework.’’ Scandinavian
Sport Studies Forum 3:1–23.
Kim, Yeon Soo, Yoon Soo Park, John P. Allegrante, et al. 2012. ‘‘Relationship between
Physical Activity and General Mental Health.’’ Preventive Medicine 55 (5): 458–
63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2012.08.021. Medline:22981733
Kimmelman, Michael. 2010. ‘‘Women Who Hit Very Hard and How They’ve Changed
Tennis.’’ New York Times Magazine, August 29. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/
08/29/magazine/29Tennis-t.html
Kirby, Sandra, Lorraine Greaves, and Olena Hankivsky. 2000. The Dome of Silence:
Sexual Harassment and Abuse in Sport. Halifax, NS: Fernwood.
Knight, Jennifer, and Traci Giuliano. 2003. ‘‘Blood, Sweat, and Jeers: The Impact of the
Media’s Heterosexist Portrayals on Perceptions of Male and Female Athletes.’’
Journal of Sport Behavior 26 (3): 272–84.
Koivula, Nathalie. 1999. ‘‘Sport Participation: Differences in Motivation and Actual
Participation Due to Gender Typing.’’ Journal of Sport Behavior 22 (3): 360–80.
——. 2001. ‘‘Perceived Characteristics of Sports Categorized as Gender-Neutral, Feminine
and Masculine.’’ Journal of Sport Behavior 24 (4): 377–93.
Krane, Vikki. 2001. ‘‘We Can Be Athletic and Feminine, but Do We Want To?
Challenging Hegemonic Femininity in Women’s Sport.’’ Quest 53 (1): 115–33.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00336297.2001.10491733
Kristiansen, Elsa, Trygve B. Broch, and Paul M. Pedersen. 2014. ‘‘Negotiating Gender
in Professional Soccer: An Analysis of Female Footballers in the United States.’’
Choregia 10 (1): 5–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.4127/ch.2014.0084

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
90 International Journal OF FEMINIST APPROACHES TO Bioethics 9:2

Lindner, Katharina. 2012. ‘‘Women’s Boxing at the 2012 Olympics: Gender Trouble?’’
Feminist Media Studies 12 (3): 464–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2012.698092
Lorber, Judith. 1993. ‘‘Believing Is Seeing: Biology as Ideology.’’ Gender & Society 7 (4):
568–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/089124393007004006
Matteo, Sherri. 1988. ‘‘The Effect of Gender-Schematic Processing on Decisions about
Sex-Inappropriate Sport Behavior.’’ Sex Roles 18 (1–2): 41–58. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1007/BF00288016
McCree, Roy Dereck. 2011. ‘‘The Death of a Female Boxer: Media, Sport, Nationalism,
and Gender.’’ Journal of Sport and Social Issues 35 (4): 327–49. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1177/0193723511426290
McLeod, Carolyn. 2009. ‘‘The Full Range of the Objectification of Women.’’ In Philo-
sophical Perspectives on Gender in Sport and Physical Activity, ed. Davis Paul
and Charlene Weaving, 64–82. New York: Routledge.
Messner, Michael. 1988. ‘‘Sports and Male Domination: The Female Athlete as Con-
tested Ideological Terrain.’’ Sociology of Sport Journal 5:197–211.
Nelson, Mariah Burton. 1994. The Stronger Women Get, the More Men Love Football:
Sexism and the American Culture of Sports. New York: Harcourt Brace.
Noel, HarmoniJoie. 2009. ‘‘Un-Doing Gendered Power Relations through Martial
Arts?’’ International Journal of Social Inquiry 2 (2): 17–37.
Pronger, Brian. 2009. ‘‘Outta My Endzone: Sport and the Territorial Anus.’’ In Philo-
sophical Perspectives on Gender in Sport and Physical Activity, ed. Davis Paul
and Charlene Weaving, 160–77. New York: Routledge.
Rauscher, Lauren, Kerrie Kauer, and Bianca D. M. Wilson. 2013. ‘‘The Healthy Body
Paradox: Organizational and Interactional Influences on Preadolescent Girls’
Body Image in Los Angeles.’’ Gender & Society 27 (2): 208–30. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1177/0891243212472054
Ravaldi, Claudia, Alfredo Vannacci, Enrica Bolognesi, et al. 2006. ‘‘Gender Role, Eating
Disorder Symptoms, and Body Image Concern in Ballet Dancers.’’ Journal of Psycho-
somatic Research 61 (4): 529–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2006.04.016.
Medline:17011362
Sailors, Pam. 2013. ‘‘Gender Roles Roll.’’ Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 7 (2): 245–58.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17511321.2012.737012
Schneider, Angela. 2000. ‘‘On the Definition of ‘Woman’ in the Sport Context.’’ In Values
in Sport: Elitism, Nationalism, Gender Equality, and the Scientific Manufacturing
of Winners, ed. Torbjörn Tännsjö and Claudio Marcello Tamburrini, 123–38. New
York: E & FN Spon.
Södergren, Marita, Jan Sundquist, Sven-Erik Johansson, and Kristina Sundquist. 2008.
‘‘Physical Activity, Exercise and Self-Rated Health: A Population-Based Study
from Sweden.’’ BMC Public Health 8: 352. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-
8-352. Medline:18840294
Sundgot-Borgen, Jorunn, Nanna L. Meyer, Timothy G. Lohman, et al. 2013. ‘‘How to
Minimise the Health Risks to Athletes Who Compete in Weight-Sensitive Sports
Review and Position Statement on Behalf of the Ad Hoc Research Working

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SYLVIA BURROW 91

Group on Body Composition, Health and Performance, under the Auspices

of the IOC Medical Commission.’’ British Journal of Sports Medicine 47 (16):
1012–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2013-092966. Medline:24115480
Tännsjö, Torbjörn. 2000. ‘‘Against Sexual Discrimination in Sports.’’ In Values in Sport
Elitism, Nationalism, Gender Equality, and the Scientific Manufacturing of Winners,
ed. Torbjörn Tännsjö and Claudio Marcello Tamburrini, 101–15. New York: E &
FN Spon.
Vincent, John. 2004. ‘‘Game, Sex, and Match: The Construction of Gender in British
Newspaper Coverage of the 2000 Wimbledon Championships.’’ Sociology of Sport
Journal 21 (4): 435–56.
Vives-Cases, Carmen, Maria Teresa Ruiz-Cantero, Vicenta Escribà-Agüir, and Juan
José Miralles. 2011. ‘‘The Effect of Intimate Partner Violence and Other Forms
of Violence against Women on Health.’’ Journal of Public Health 33 (1): 15–21.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdq101. Medline:21196478
Weaving, Charlene. 2014. ‘‘Cage Fighting Like a Girl: Exploring Gender Constructions
in the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC).’’ Journal of the Philosophy of
Sport 41 (1): 129–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00948705.2013.858393
World Health Organization. 2013. ‘‘Global and Regional Estimates of Violence against
Women: Prevalence and Health Effects of Intimate Partner Violence and Non-
Partner Sexual Violence.’’ http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/
violence/9789241564625/en/
Young, Iris Marion. 2005. On Female Body Experience: ‘‘Throwing Like a Girl’’ and
Other Essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/
0195161920.001.0001

Contributor Information
Sylvia Burrow is associate professor of philosophy at Cape Breton University
in Sydney, Nova Scotia. Her research addresses autonomy as both embodied and
relational, grounding this work in feminist ethical and political contexts that include
medical relationships, violence against women, and self-defense.

This content downloaded from

182.255.0.242 on Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:19:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms