Gender Equity in Sports Policy at the US and the UK - Essay Example

Gender Equity in Sports Policy: Case Study of the US and the UK 2007 Introduction National policies regarding sports is an important area not simply because of the entertainment value of the sector but because it provides livelihoods of a large number of sportsperson, trainers and organizers worldwide. Besides, sports instills values like discipline, team work, goal setting, communication and ethics that are important to social development. Particularly for women, sports is an empowering activity through its focus on perseverance and excellence. Both men and women are engaged in the profession and sporting values are equally applicable to all. Gender issues in sports policy concerns issues that are similar to any other professional or academic fields. It involves all policies regarding funding, management and decision-making in sports. While it is often contended that men’s sports should get more funding as it has more participation as well as attracts more fans, women activists take the stand that the situation is so because women’s sports has for long been given an inferior status that men’s sports. Women are increasingly becoming more assertive and participating in a wide array of fields and sports is no exception. Even if women’s sports have achieved less than men’s sports in the past, it is not because of genetic differences but a result of cumulative process of social stereotyping. Hence, the issue of gender equality is as contentious as in the employment or education. This paper will analyze the sports policy in the United States and the United Kingdom to study whether sports policy has initiated gender equity notions to overcome stereotyping. I will compare and contrast the two national policies and also attempt to analyze whether these policies adhere to internationally accepted norms. I will also study whether the policies have in fact been able to overcome the gender stereotyping that has existed for long in the global sports arena. National sports policy in the United States and the United Kingdom In the United States, the Title IX ruling in 1972 amended the 1964 Civil Rights Act by barring sex discrimination in education institutes that accept federal funding. The Office of Civil Rights, that executes the provisions issued the Intercollegiate Athletic Policy Interpretation in 1979 that stipulates gender equity in sports (NCAA). This ruling has forced colleges and universities to have men’s and women’s sports events in equal numbers as well as nearly the same number of men and women athletes and the same amount of funding for men’s and women’s sports (CAAWS). Critics of Title IX contend that many colleges and universities have to drop men’s sports programs simply because there are not the equal numbers of women interested in sports in the campus. For example, according to National Collegiate Athletic Association, 200 men’s teams in colleges have been withdrawn; the Gymnastics teams were reduced from 133 to 32 in 1998 and the California State stopped the sports quota system at the University in 1993. On the other hand, a survey at Brown University found 50 percent of men and 30 percent of women were interested in participating in athletic events and 13 percent less women than men at Vassar College participate in sports on the campus (Olsen, 1998). The first World Conference on Women’s Sport was held in Brighton, UK in 1994. The United Kingdom government endorsed the Brighton Declaration hence committing itself to promote gender equality in sports. In 2001, the government followed up with forming the UK Coordinating Group on Women and Sports (UKCGWS), which along with five sports councils in the country and a number of agencies and experts has formulated the UK Strategic Framework for the development of women’s sports in the country. Aimed “to change sporting culture in the UK to one that values the diversity of women and enables their full involvement in every aspect of sport”, the Strategic Framework has identified three key areas of focus – participation, performance and excellence and leadership (UK Sport). Compared to the US sports policy, the UK government has adopted a policy more attuned to the social system. Rather than imposing stringent norms on the academic organizations to ensure more women’s sporting participation, the UK government has a participatory approach to promote women in sports. However, the government, despite the avowed principles of gender equity, has not been able to promote women’s participation and excellence in sports to a great extent. With no legal stipulation to promote women’s sports, UK invests much less on women’s sports than on men’s sports (UK Sport). The scene is the same as regards to the number of women decision-makers in the field of sport. For example, there was only 1 woman in the British Olympic Team Manager for the Sydney Olympics in 2000 although 40 percent of the team was composed of women who won 42 percent of the medal (UK Sports). It is generally recognized that inclusion of women in decision-making promotes democracy as well as improving the comfort level of women participants. Despite national policies on gender equity in sports in both the United States and the United Kingdom as in many other countries, there are various explicit discrimination against women’s participation. For example, the Augusta National Golf Club in the United States does not allow women members. On the other hand, the 250 year old Royal & Ancient Club in Scotland lifted the ban on women for the Open Championship in 2005 (Hannan, 2006). Policies and Gender Stereotyping in Sports in the two countries Despite the gender equity promoted by the Title IX guidelines in the US, which stipulates federal funding of sports in colleges, the status of women’s sports are not at par with that of men’s sports. This is evident in the differences in pay and media coverage for men’s and women’s sports. For example, the US National Committee on Pay Equity notes that the average salary of Women’s National Basketball Association (WNBA) is 2 percent less than the men’s National Basketball Association. Similarly, the media focus less on women’s sports than on the more marketable men’s sports. A survey of 285 newspapers in south-eastern United States in 2003 found that 25 percent of the sports editors and deputy editors feel that women naturally have less proficiency in athletics than men and that Title IX is ruining men’s sports. Nearly 90 percent of these media persons believe that their approach reflects the general reader perception as well and 45 percent feel that women are not interested in sports. Only the young editors are a little inclined towards accepting women in the fraternity (Planet Work). Such stereotyping is evident in various comments by male sportspersons, commentators and administrators. For example, a New York Mets broadcaster commented about women in the dugouts as following: “I won’t say that women belong in the kitchen, but they don’t belong in the dugout” (quoted in Hannan, 2006). Such stereotyping of women’s participation in sports emerges from the age-old ideas of masculinity and feminine. It also has a snowballing effect on women’s participation, performance and excellence in sports. It also has a negative impact of sports in general. For example, coaching of sportspersons has remained a mostly male bastion that has excluded the development of potentially good women coaches. Conversely, men who are inherently not inclined towards sports may become victims of the stereotyping and develop inferiority complex of being less manly. In the United Kingdom, the General Household Survey (1996) found that 32 percent less number of women than men participate in sports. Also, another survey by Youth Sport Trust (2000) found that 40 percent of girls stopped attending Physical Education class and school sport by the time the complete high school (UK Sports). However, in terms of excellence, women have not fared badly as can be seen from the proportion of medals won by British women in the Sydney Olympics. This to some extent refutes the argument that is forwarded in the United States about inherent inferiority of women in sports. In the United States, sport is a million dollar industry yet the media concentrates mostly on men’s sports. Most local, national and international tournaments are played by both men and women but the media covers mostly the men’s events. It was found in 2004 that sport coverage on television in the United States for men’s and women’s events were in the ratio of 95 to 1. The same ratio in print was 20 to 1 (Hannan, 2006). As in the United States, media coverage of women winners in sports is far less than the men in the United Kingdom. There are also barriers to women in taking up sports coaching as a profession. For the Sydney Olympics 2000, only 8 percent of the coaches and 4 percent of the managers of the British team were women (UK Sport). In 2005, the US Olympic Committee and the International Labor Organization hosted a conference on “Effecting Social Change through women’s leadership in sports” in Atlanta (Hannan, 2006). It is often argued that women are inherently less competitive than men in order to explain the reasons for lesser participation of women in sports. However, it is arguable that much of the behavioral pattern is due to the social stereotyping and social exclusion of women from the playground that has developed the image in the minds of people, both men and women (Hannan, 2006). Perhaps in a somewhat exaggerated way, the American suffragist, Susan B Anthony, argued as early as 1857 that sports has an important policy in women’s emancipation when she said, “Bicycle has done more to emancipate women than any other thing in the world” (quoted in Hannan, 2006). However, to the credit to the country’s sports world many be mentioned that there was a wide-scale protest against the comment and the woman in question became the first full-time employee in a big league’s training club. The power equation that is grossly biased against women in sport is evident also in the trend towards sexual exploitation of women, further aggravated by the fact that there are so few women in decision-making. An American sport commentator, Frank Deford, noted that male athletes are deposed with so much power from the media and the society at large that they are hostile to the attitude of being turned down by a less powerful being, a woman. Hence, there charges of sexual oppression in the sport come up every other day. Yet, Deford points out, violence against women has not made a dent into the popularity of sport even in areas like National Basketball Association where allegations of sexual misconduct are rampant (Hannan, 2006). Theoretical perspectives in developing gender equity in sports Over the last couple of decades, there is an increasing realization that sport has an important role to play in development goals like education, health, empowerment, community building, tolerance, cooperative spirit and leadership development. In particular, sports is now recognized as an important tool to promote democratic principles, through developing a team spirit, as well as political and social tolerance. Leadership qualities that are so essential in team sports can equally be utilized in social and economic initiatives in developing as well as developed countries. The United Nations, in 2003, passed a resolution to use sport as a tool for promoting education, health, peace and development. The year 2005 was declared as the International Year for Sport and Physical Education. In addition to using sport as a tool for human development, the resolution in particular aimed to “promote culture of peace, social and gender equality and advocate dialogue and harmony through collective work promoting sport and physical education-based opportunities for solidarity and cooperation” (quoted in Hannan, 2006). Earlier, the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action at the Fourth United Nations General World Conference on Women in 1995 required member countries to ensure fundamental rights of both men and women in all areas. It was recognized that there is a tendency of marginalization of “women’s issues” as a separate and somewhat inferior status. Gender mainstreaming by which all strategies and policies by member countries would have a gender perspective was agreed upon. The Declaration noted that sport is a crucial element of empowering women and under-representation of women in decision-making of sport programs has meant that the main sports institutions have remained male-centric. Further, there is a lot of scope in promoting gender-sensitive social programs through sports. Article 10 of the Convention of Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women urged governments to adopt steps that would ensure that women had equal rights as men in areas of education, and in particular sports and physical education. A review of the Beijing Declaration conducted in 2005 by the UN found that hurdles faced by women in various areas continue to exist in most member countries (Hannan, 2006). Conclusion Thus, it is globally recognized that sport can be used as an important tool to promote empowerment of women as well as other social goals of peace, harmony, cooperation and democracy. Yet, the gender stereotyping in sport is perhaps more acute than in any other field. The age-old idea of lower physical acumen of women has been rejected by social thinkers and scientists. It is increasingly recognized that lower visibility of women on the sport fields, whether as participants, trainers or administrators, is more the result of past discrimination that has had a spiraling effect over the years as well as a deliberate albeit unconscious effort to marginalize women. While it has been seen that involving women in a particular field results in increased team spirit and cooperation and many governments of the world has adopted explicit policies to bring in women to sports, the initiatives have not yet yielded much results. While the United States and the United Kingdom are one of the developed countries that have national policies regarding women in sports, sex stereotyping continues to be present in these countries. Chauvinistic approaches towards government policies that impose gender equality on sports in campuses are as evident as it is in the comments often made by male sports commentators. In both countries, training and managing sports organizations remain typically male arenas. As a result, the tendency towards gender inequity continues. This is most visible in the difference in media coverage of men’s and women’s events. Since media coverage is supposed to be reflective of the social psyche, it is assumed that the society at large is also biased against women on the sports field. This has resulted in the perpetuation of a tendency of marginalization of women in physical activities ostensibly on the grounds of genetic theory that have been proved to be defunct. Works Cited Planet Work, Women in Sports: How Level is the Playing Field? World of Work Magazine, International Labour Organization, http://www.ilo.org/public/english/bureau/inf/magazine/56/women_sports.htm Olsen, Walter, Title IX from Outer Space, Reason Magazine, February 1998, http://www.ilo.org/public/english/bureau/inf/magazine/56/women_sports.htm NCAA, Title IX and Gender Equity, http://www1.ncaa.org/membership/ed_outreach/gender_equity/general_info/facts.html UK Sport, Strategic Framework for Women and Sport, http://www.uksport.gov.uk/assets/File/Generic_Template_Documents/Standards_in_Sport/StrategyandEquity_Nov03.pdf Hannan, Carolyn, Challenging the Gender Order, Opening keynote speech at the Fourth World Conference on Women and Sport, Kumamoto, Japan, May 2006, http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/news/speech2006/WC%20Women%20and%20Sports%20Japan%202006.pdf Read More