- Email: [email protected]
Sports and women's culture
Women’s Sfules Inr Forum, Vol 10, No 4, pp 361-368, 1987 USA
Printed L”the
0
0277~5395/87 $3 00 + 00 Rr8a111on Journals Ltd
SPORTS AND WOMEN’S CULTURE KARIFASTING Norwegian College of Physical Education and Sport, Box 40, KnngsJaa, 0807 Oslo 8, Norway
Synopsis-Ttus article focuses on the fact that women and men belong to two different cultures. Concerning sport partiapation, there exists a double standard m the way girls and boys are soaallzed mto sport. As a result, sport has never played an Important part in many women’s lives. This IS illustrated by data from different empincal studies that have been done in Norway during recent years. In discussmg the future development of women’s sport, three approaches are discussed: (1) when women become more and more hke men, (2) when women preserve and develop what has been defined as typical female characteristics and actmties, and (3) when the androgynous person becomes the normative objective. The author demonstrates that the dbelopment so far is the one mentioned m the first point This 1sequality on men’s terms The advantage of such a development ISquestioned The ideology of society today, which also ISreflected m the world of sport, has to be changed As a consequence, sport should be humanized. It IStherefore necessary that women and the central values m women’s culture become a strong Influence on the development of sport.
INTRODUCTION In a patriarchal society men decide what is proper behavior for both sexes. Sometimes the same behavior is evaluated differently for girls and boys. One can say that there exists a double standard in the way girls and boys are treated. Margrit Eichler (1977) defines a double standard as “all norms, rules and practises which evaluate, reward and punish identical behavior for women and men differently.” She states that sex role socialization is the systematic teaching of a double standard, and that it has been successful when it is “internalized to such a degree that any of its manifestations seem just natural to the people affected by it.” As a result of this socialization one may say that female and male adults live in two separate and different worlds, The Norwegian feminist, scholar Berit As (1982), formulates it in this way: “when a whole world of action and ideas seem to be different for two groups we can state that they belong to two different cultures.” This concept of culture also implies that women and men have developed different social relationships. As a result, a feeling of community has grown up among women. This spirit of community gives security, even when suppression becomes conscious. What does this imply for sports? Let us for a moment give attention to the concept of the double standard. Eichler (1977) states that 361
‘what is important is to demonstrate that behavior which is being evaluated or measured in fact is the same and that different rewards and punishments ensue for the sexes.’ (Eichler, 1977: 16) Sport participation is an area where the same behavior easily can be compared. It has also been demonstrated in many studies that the behavior of girls and boys in sports is evaluated differently. Girls and boys learn at a very early age that sport participation is valued more positively for males than for females (Dorothy Earris, 1981b). As a consequence, organized sport has never been a central part of the female culture in Norway. This is due to the fact that, historically, Norway has never had sex-separated sport organizations as in the USA and Great Britain. Sports organizations have been run solely for men while women have been allowed to participate, but on men’s terms. The second form has been the most common, and is the general pattern one finds in a patriarchal society. In my opinion, the double standard of the sex role socialization and specificly, the socialization into sport, manifests itself in the culture of women and in the way women experience, relate to, and participate in sport. In the following pages, I attempt to exemplify this by using empirical data from research studies made in Norway.
KARI FASTING
362
they are suppressed. Women may even be suppressed without knowing it. We have “learned” and internalized that certain sports The Norwegian Confederation of Sport con- drsctplines do not fit us, or are harmful to sists of about forty-five different mdrvidual our bodies (e.g., Eichler: The sex role socialsport federations. In 1983, thirty-five percent ization has been successful). Empirical data of the members were women. Today, female from a Norwegian study among thirty year membership has increased to forty percent. old married women and men m Oslo may This is a quite high percentage compared to illustrate this. The participants were asked to many other countries, and probably effected score eighteen individual sports as to whethby the Equal Rights Act, which was passed in er “they thought the sports were most suit1979. In some sports, women account for able for females, for males, or for both more than fifty percent of the membership. sexes.” About eighty-two percent of both males The largest ones are gymnastics (eighty-five percent), equitation (seventy-three percent), and females answered that they thought and European handball (sixty-six percent). wrestling was most suitable for males. About These figures reflect which sports society has seventy percent of both sexes had the same accepted as appropriate for females. Since it opinion about weightlifting. 1s men who have had the leading admmutraAnother interesting result in this study tive positions in the sports organizations, it 1s was that women seemed to be more positive men who have decided which activities are to men’s participation in typical female acsuitable for women. Every time women have tivities, than both men and women were to attempted to participate m a “new” sport, female participation m traditional male they have been denied participation. sports. Sixty-five percent of all females, for Different arguments have been used, example, answered that jazz-gymnastics was mostly physiological and medical m characsuitable for both sexes. The percentage ter. Men have been especially concerned among men was forty-eight. Corresponding about the effects of physical exercise and results for ballet were seventy-six percent and training on females’ reproductive organs. fifty-six percent. Men in Norway and elsewhere continue to “Participation in sport will mascuhnize feuse these arguments in spite of the fact, that males and is therefore valued negatively.” the American Association for Sport Medi- This statement has often been pronounced, cine claimed as early as 1964, that there were especially by males. It is important to focus no medical or physiological reasons for not on the fact that masculine and feminine beletting females take part in the same sport havior are culturally bound. The concepts disciplines as males (Joint Committee of are therefore extremely resistant to change American Associatron for Health, Physical (Dorothy Harris, 1981a). Education and Recreation, 1964). Today, In recent years, other types of arguments some medical doctors claim that females are have been used when females have tried to better suited, physiologically and psychologextend their partrcrpatton in sports. These arically than men for long endurance training guments have been of a practical and techni(Elizabeth Ferris, 1979). This does not neces- cal character. History has already proven, sarily mean that women should participate m that many of them had no basis in reality exactly the same sports as males do, not at (Gerd von der Lrppe, 1982). A good example is the development of female soccer in Norall. The point is, however, that when females m 1980 were not allowed to run 3000 metres way. Women were excluded from this sport until 1976. Arguments used against female at the Olympic Games, because “it was too strenuous for women,” this argument had no soccer were connected to physiology (harmful towards women’s bodies) and practical basis m modern medical science (Ferris, conditions (lack of soccer fields-it would be 1980). The Olympic Committee which made the a disaster for soccer [read men’s] if women decision, consists exclusively of older men. too should occupy the soccer fields). Today, What is important then is that women are soccer is one of the largest female sports in not allowed to decide about their own lives Norway. More precisely, soccer IS favoured and bodies, and they cannot freely choose fourth after gymnastics, skung, and European handball their own actrvitres m which to participate. Soccer has therefore had a dramatic One may therefore state that in this matter NORWEGIAN WOMEN’S INVOLVEMENT IN SPORT
Sport and Women’s Culture
growth during the last few years. The same thing has occurred in Sweden, where it has become the second largest sport. The fantastic growth of women’s participation in soccer in Scandinavia is a good example of what changes may occur when women no longer are excluded from a sport. Until recently, soccer was regarded as a typical “masculine sport.” The fact that eighty-five percent of the males and eight-two percent of the females m the study mentioned above answered that soccer is suitable for both sexes, shows that rapid changes concerning people’s attitudes to women’s participation in a particular sports discipline may occur under certain circumstances. I think the reasons for the positive development of women’s soccer in Norway should be analyzed. The very strong and excellent female leader and the strong female committee working within the soccer association, were extremely important factors. These women have worked systematically to promote soccer for girls and women, and educate female soccer coaches and female soccer sportleaders. A study carried out in 1983 among all the individual sport federations, showed that women were underrepresented in sporting roles such as referees, coaches, and so forth (Kari Fasting, 1984). In Table 1, all the individual sport federations are assembled. We notice the discrepancy between female active members and the other sporting roles. Among all coaches responsible for the toplevel athletes in Norway, only seven percent were females. In Table 2, the five largest individual sports federations m Norway are presented. The table shows the percentage of female members on executive boards, the percentage of women who attended the last General Assembly, and so forth. One can see that, compared to the percentage of member-
363
ships, women are underrepresented in all categories. This is true even for sports where more than fifty percent of the active members are women. As in other countries, the sports organizations are ruled by men. Someone may ask if this makes any difference. The way the picture looks today, one may say that the sports organizations, even traditional female sports such as gymnastics, reinforce the general pattern found in a patriarchy. The Confederation of Sport is the largest voluntary association in Norway. Recreational sport and outdoor life also play an important part m the Norwegian’s way of living. The fact that even female sports are ruled by men is therefore detrimental to the development of a future non-patriarchal society. This picture of the sports organizations is a mirror of society in general. As an effect of women’s and men’s different socializations, few powerful leadership positions are held by women. Even though legislation guarantees women and men equal rights, it seems to be more difficult for women to enter powerful leadership positions. According to Helga Marie Hernes (1982), women and men will never be equally situated as long as girls’ socialization is directed towards the private sphere. She states that women’s underrepresentation may be explained as a natural and logical consequence of the female’s situation in the past, where women systematically were excluded from public life and leadership positions. This opinion seems, however, to be institutionally rooted and developed as a part of our collective consciousness.’ ‘This seems to be the same phenomenon as stated by Margrlt Elchler (1977) when she writes about the “Successful sex role soclahzatlon,” which means that “its mamfestations seem Just natural to the people affected by It ”
T’able 1 Overvxw of women’s posItIons m the 41 mdlvldual sport federations 1983 Posltions Active Parttclpatmg Members Partlclpants at the Federation’s General Assembly Members of the Boards of the Federations Members of Committees Coaches at Higher Levels Referees at Higher Levels
Percent 35 19 15 II 12 7
364
KARIFASTING Table 2 Women partrcrpants m the 5 largest mdrvrdual sport federattons (m percent) Indtvldual Federation Soccer Sknng Gymnastrcs Track & Fteld European Handball
Members of the Boards
Participants at the General Assembly 1983
Members of Commtttees
14 36 85 41
0 11 50 8
2 2 58 18
7 2 42 12
66
30
10
10
Parttctpatmg Members
Consequently, one can question female leaders actual possibilities for demonstrating power (Hernes, 1982). Keeping this in mind, a study was set up at the General Assembly of the Norwegian Confederation of Sport in 1984 (Kari Fasting and Mari-Kristin Sisjord, 1986). Based on the general assumption that persons talking a lot at a meeting have greater influence than individuals who are less active in discussions, combined with studies showing that men tend to talk more than women when both are participants m group interaction, the main question m the study was: Do female sports leaders have power and influence on the future development of sports? The following hypotheses were put forward: 1. Proportionally more men than women give speeches. 2. On the average, men talk more than women, both regarding the number of speeches and the time spent on each of them. 3. Women’s and men’s contributions to the debates vary with the different issues. The main results of the study, are presented in Figure 1. At the bottom of the figure is shown the distribution between female and male memberships, forty percent women and sixty percent men. The next stage presents the distribution between the sexes at the General Assembly, twenty-five percent and seventy-five percent. Stage 3 shows the percentage of women’s and men’s participation in debates. The women’s part has decreased to twenty-one percent. The female delegates part of the total sum of all contributions, was only thirteen percent which is visualized at the top of Figure 1. It should also be mentioned that on the issues where women did participate, they
gave fewer speeches than men. Female speeches were in a majority on only one issue. Not surprisingly, the issue in question was children’s sport. The authors concluded that there were five relationships which indicated that women’s influence in the Confederation of Sport was insignificant (Fasting and Sisjord, 1986). 1. The under representation of women at the General Assembly. 2. The assumption that there exists a positive relationship between verbal behavior, power, and influence. 3. The assumption that women are paid less attention than men.
%
0
1
rsp
100
DELEGATES I
H
WOMEN
I
MEN
Fig 1 Women’s and men’s degree of parttcrpatron at the__General Assembly of the Norwegian Confederatron of sport, 1984
Sport and Women’s Culture
4. Women’s lack of contribution to central issues. 5. Women’s low verbal participation at the General Assembly.
365
difficult to get away from home,” “I’m too tired due to other obligations” and “The children require me to be around all the time.” FUTURE APPROACHES
So far, only empirical data from organized sport have been presented. In the study among thirty year old married women and men in Oslo (Kari Fasting, 1984) fifty-four percent of the women were physically active in their leisure time. To be defined as physically active, one had to exercise regularly, at least once a week. The corresponding percentage among men was sixty-seven. When the participants were asked if they had competed in any sports during the last year, the percentage dropped to respectively six and thirty-eight. This indicates a low interest for competitive sport among women, which again is a result of the sex role socialization. In analyzing the data from this research project, another interesting phenomenon was discovered. Very few of the female participants were members of a sports club. Altogether twenty-two percent of all women and fifty-four percent of all men were members. Among people defined as physically active, only thirty percent of the women were members of a sports club. The corresponding percentage among males was seventy. One may question why so few women who exercise are members of sports club. My assumption is that a sports club which is dominated by male leaders, does not offer activities organized in a way that are attractive to women. The male dominated sports clubs do not fit the culture of women, simply because they do not have the qualifications required to fulfil women’s needs and wishes. As a result of the sexual division of labour women have, compared to men, less free time to their own disposal. Even the concept of leisure does not fit the culture of women, because leisure often has been defined as “free time from work and other obligations” (Joffre Dumazedier, 1967; Stanley Parker, 1971). The fact that women have little time at their own disposal will naturally influence their involvement in sports. This is also reflected in the answers that women often give as reasons for not participating. In the study among thirty year old women, the most common answers to the question “Why don’t you exercise regularly?” were as follows: “I give priority to the family,” “I’m too lazy,” “It’s
Live Brekke and Runa Haukaa (1980) identify three different approaches in the debate concerning changes in society towards greater liberation for women. These are: 1. Women become more and more like men. 2. Women preserve and develop what have been identified as typically female characteristics and activities. 3. The androgynous person becomes the normative objective. In the last section of the article, I will discuss these three approaches in relation to women and sport. The first approach implies that women are given the same opportunities as men concerning sport participation. They will be allowed to compete in sports from which they are excluded today. They will get the same amount of money, as well qualified coaches as men, the sports will be played by the same rules as for men and so forth. This approach therefore means equality on men’s terms. If more women are to be attracted to sports (men’s sport), it would be easier for them if they became more like men. As a consequence, those values that dominate both the male culture and the sport culture today, will be internalized in a future female sport culture. If such a change should take place, it might probably be as an effect of a larger change in society in general, where the female gender role moves towards the traditional male gender role. Neither sport behavior, nor the way it is organized today, necessarily have to change. Men will, in the future continue to hold the most important positions in the sports organizations. Women will, however, gradually take over some of these leading positions. But, history has shown that this will take many, many years. The question is therefore, will women be satisfied with such a development? A development, which implies that they have to participate in a sport organized by and for males, and at the same time have few opportunities to influence the future development of sports. A consequence of the second approach may be a change in sports itself as well as the
KARIFASTING
366
way it is organized. One may of course question if sports, which is so centered around achievement and competition, can be mfluenced by dominant values in the culture of women. On the other hand, there are probably none who would not agree to the fact that sport competitions can take place in another atmosphere than the one which is illustrated by the slogan “winnmg isn’t everything, it’s the only thing.” A natural consequence of the change in sports would be sex-separated sports organizations, at least for a certain period. This change implies that important ideological aspects of the traditional female role may be preserved and further developed. It does not mean a status quo of the gender roles in society. A development and a change is necessary if women are going to have the opportunity to develop their own sports. It 1s difficult to separate the first and the second approaches and the distmction may, m practice, appear insignificant. The thud approach may, however, be considered a compromise between the other two. Androgynous sport will, according to Mary Duquin (1978), be a sport which realizes the values of both process and product. In addition to a change in the sport itself such a development also implies changes of the female and the male gender roles, if both sexes are to become highly attracted by sports. Since sports means male-sports, it is the women who have the best qualifications for changing sports in a more feministic and humanistic direction. Due to this fact, women must gam powerful positrons m the sports organizations. If this cannot be done through normal elections, special rules or legislation must be made. This practice is employed by political organizations as well as in the educational systems m Scandinavia today. CONCLUSION The Norwegian world record holder of the 5.0OOm and lO.OOOmrace, Ingrid Kristiansen, received only half as much money for her start in the Bislet Games last summer as the male runner, Steve Cram. This demonstrates that discrimination still exists, and that the best female runner m the world is not valued as high as the best male runner. Sportswomen today are probably better off concerning facilities, coaches, and other resources than some years ago.
Another development that has taken place during the past few years, is that women today are permitted to compete in sports disciplines and events which earlier were exclusively for men, like the 5.OOOm and the lO.OOOmrace in track and field. This demonstrates that we are moving toward equality in sports under the men’s conditions. This is a clear example of the first approach. Bonnie Beck (1980) states that the women’s movement and resurgence of feminism in the 1960s and the 1970s in the USA, changed the message, but not the result. Women co-opted men’s sport. She writes that women’s sport moved toward the male established, male defined, male developed and male governed sports. Surprismgly enough, this seems to have happened in a country where, at least in collegial sports, women have had their own organization (AIAW). She characterizes women’s sport in this period the following way: “Equal Opportunity, Separate but Equal Teams, ” “You have it and we want it,” “We’ll take one half of what you’ve got!” If we for a moment leave the world of sport and analyze the development of society in general, one may say that it is characterized by higher unemployment, more people who are starving, the chances of a nuclear war is greater than any time before, pollution is damaging the earth, and so forth. All this is a result of male politics. Many women all over the world question this development. It is almost ten years since a Norwegian female philosopher (Nina Karm Monsen, 1975) claimed that the masculine conquer philosophy had failed, and that society had to realize the importance of changing the dominating values and attitudes that exists in the world today. Should this discussion not also concern the world of sport? It surprises me that very few female scholars question the male development of sport. Even dominant socral scientists do not seem to question the value of female top level sport! A review of the literature demonstrates that “equality” still is important. But why should women run the marathon because men do it? Why should we participate m top-level sport? Do we get a better society by having many top-level female athletes, who have to damage their bodies to be the best m the world? Why is it so important to win Olympic gold medals? Isn’t it better to have thousands of women doing recreational sports? Wouldn’t it be better to have a
367
Sport and Women’s Culture
healthy body, that women themselves control? The reason why so few female scholars seem to question the value of the way sport is both organized and performed today has probably something to do with the ideology of the society, where, in some countries, as in the USA for example, winning and being the best in the world is very, very important, no matter what the consequences are. But has it always been like this? According to Ellen W. Gerber, Jan Felshin, Pearl Berlin, and Waneen Wyrick (1974) women developed guidelines for women’s sport as early as 1923 in the USA, which obviously had another ideology than the men’s sport. The following mottos illustrate this: “a sport for every girl, a girl in every sport” and “play for the enjoyment of playing”. It seems to me that the philosophy of sport at that time was much more in accordance with central values in women’s lives and culture. It is possible, of course, to play, and also to compete, and to perform without exaggerating the winning aspect, and especially the consequences of winning. History demonstrates that sport does not have to be so closely linked to the ideology of winning, as many people seem to believe today. It is also worth mentioning that there are cultures where sports are dominated by other values than in the western societies. In Chrna, for example, friendship seems to mean more than the competition itself. Even in some American Indian cultures, a player will stop the game if she notices that her opponent becomes sad when she is losing (Fasting, 1983). In her book Education for Peace (1985), Birgrt Brock-Utne asks the fonowing questrons: ‘Are we going to compete against each other like men do? Are we to copy men’s sports in the name of equality? Are we going to compete against men, maybe beat men on their own premises? Are they going to respect us if we run faster than they do? We have to ask whether we want to become better to compete, to take over men’s sports and men’s rules, to accept that it is fun to beat others, or to make men lose.’ (Birgit Brock-Utne, 1985: 144-145). Brock Utne argues that feminist sports must be sports without competition, and that instead of competition we should focus on sport and cooperation. In my opinion, it is necessary to change the
dominant values of today’s society. These values are strongly reflected in the world of sport. But how do we do it? How do we get organized? The question of separatism or assimilation in the way sport is organized is a difficult one. Due to historical and cultural differences, there are probably individual solutions for different countries. If Bonnie Beck’s (1980) analysis is correct, it may not be sufficient to have sex-separated organizations. pethaps it is more important to have human beings who are powerful sports leaders who really want to humanize sports? Women as a group, have better prerequisites and are better suited for this than men, in my opinion, due to their socialization, which has resulted in a female culture. It is these valuable female qualities that must be saved and developed, so we can create a better world to live in. As a consequence we must organize our lives so that women get into powerful positions both m political institutions and in the world of sport. REFERENCES As, Bern 1982. Ttlbakebhkk og stdebhkk pa begrepet kvmnekultur In Haukaa. R et al , eds, Kvmneforsknmng:Bidrag Td Samfunnsteorr. Uruversrtetsforlaget, Oslo Beck, Bonnie A 1980. The future of women’s sport* Issues, insights, and struggles In Sabo, Donald F. and Runfola, Ross, eds, Jock. Sports & Male Identrty Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ Brekke, Live and Haukaa, Runa. 1980. Teonn som inte firms Kvmnovetenskap~qt T&kr# 1: 30-45 Brock-Utne, Btrgtt. 1985 Education for Peace A Femrrust Perspectrve Pergamon Press, New York. Dumazedler, Joffre. 1967. ‘Ibwarclsa Souety of Lean? The Free Press, New York Duqum, Mary 1978 The androgynous advantage In bglesby, C. A., ed, Women and Sport from Myth to Reahty Lea & Febtger, Phtladelplua. Etchler, &rgtt 1977. ?he double standard as an mdrcator of sex-status dtfferenttals. AtIantLs3: l-21 Etchler, Margnt. 1980. The Double Standard Croom Helm Ltd , London. Fasting, Karl. 1983. VI har en tdrettsverden B vmne. K~errmgrad 9: 9- 13. Fashng, K&I 1984. Idrett-hvrlke hmdrmger mdter kvmnen? In “Kvmner og Idrett. Rapport fm Llkestdhngsrhde& kot$enmse 29 mar 1984 n Oslo Fastma, Karl and Ststord, Mart-Krrstm 1986 Gender, verbal behavior and power m sports organizations. Stand. J Sports SCJ 8.81-85 Ferns, Ehzabeth 1979 Sportswomen and medrcme I + 11. In Olympic Review 138/139* 249-254; 140: 332-339 Fens, Elizabeth 1980, July Atntudes to women m sport: Pmlegomem towam!sa soctologrCartheory. Paper presented at the Int. Congr. on Women and Sport, Rome Gerber, Ellen W., Felshm, Jan, Berhn, Pearl, and Wyvtck, Waneen 1974 The Amencan Woman m Sport. Addtson-Wesley Pubhshmg Co , Massachusetts
368
KARI FASTING
Harris, Dorothy V 1981a. Femmlmty and athletlclsm. In Luschen, G. R. E and Sage, G H., eds, Handbook of Social Science and Sport Stlpes Pub1 Co , Illinois. Hams, Dorothy V 1981b. Women m socletv and theu pa;ticipatioi in sport (11) Oiymprc Riwew 161. 163-168 Hernes, Helga Mane. 1982. Staten-Kvmner Zngen Adgang? Umverntetsforlaget, Oslo Jomt Committee of the American Assoclatlon for
Health, Physxal Education and Recreation 1964 I&erclse andfitness. JAM4 188: 433-436. Llppe, Gerd ion der. 1982. Likestilling i Idretten. I Llppe, G v d Kvmner og Zdnztt Gyldendal Norsk Forlag, Oslo Monsen, Nma Karm 1975. Det Kvmnelrge Menneske Femrnrstlsk Fdosofi Aschehough & CO , Oslo Parker, Stanley. 1971 The Futunz of Work and L~LYUIP Allyn & Bacon, New York
Printed L”the
0
0277~5395/87 $3 00 + 00 Rr8a111on Journals Ltd
SPORTS AND WOMEN’S CULTURE KARIFASTING Norwegian College of Physical Education and Sport, Box 40, KnngsJaa, 0807 Oslo 8, Norway
Synopsis-Ttus article focuses on the fact that women and men belong to two different cultures. Concerning sport partiapation, there exists a double standard m the way girls and boys are soaallzed mto sport. As a result, sport has never played an Important part in many women’s lives. This IS illustrated by data from different empincal studies that have been done in Norway during recent years. In discussmg the future development of women’s sport, three approaches are discussed: (1) when women become more and more hke men, (2) when women preserve and develop what has been defined as typical female characteristics and actmties, and (3) when the androgynous person becomes the normative objective. The author demonstrates that the dbelopment so far is the one mentioned m the first point This 1sequality on men’s terms The advantage of such a development ISquestioned The ideology of society today, which also ISreflected m the world of sport, has to be changed As a consequence, sport should be humanized. It IStherefore necessary that women and the central values m women’s culture become a strong Influence on the development of sport.
INTRODUCTION In a patriarchal society men decide what is proper behavior for both sexes. Sometimes the same behavior is evaluated differently for girls and boys. One can say that there exists a double standard in the way girls and boys are treated. Margrit Eichler (1977) defines a double standard as “all norms, rules and practises which evaluate, reward and punish identical behavior for women and men differently.” She states that sex role socialization is the systematic teaching of a double standard, and that it has been successful when it is “internalized to such a degree that any of its manifestations seem just natural to the people affected by it.” As a result of this socialization one may say that female and male adults live in two separate and different worlds, The Norwegian feminist, scholar Berit As (1982), formulates it in this way: “when a whole world of action and ideas seem to be different for two groups we can state that they belong to two different cultures.” This concept of culture also implies that women and men have developed different social relationships. As a result, a feeling of community has grown up among women. This spirit of community gives security, even when suppression becomes conscious. What does this imply for sports? Let us for a moment give attention to the concept of the double standard. Eichler (1977) states that 361
‘what is important is to demonstrate that behavior which is being evaluated or measured in fact is the same and that different rewards and punishments ensue for the sexes.’ (Eichler, 1977: 16) Sport participation is an area where the same behavior easily can be compared. It has also been demonstrated in many studies that the behavior of girls and boys in sports is evaluated differently. Girls and boys learn at a very early age that sport participation is valued more positively for males than for females (Dorothy Earris, 1981b). As a consequence, organized sport has never been a central part of the female culture in Norway. This is due to the fact that, historically, Norway has never had sex-separated sport organizations as in the USA and Great Britain. Sports organizations have been run solely for men while women have been allowed to participate, but on men’s terms. The second form has been the most common, and is the general pattern one finds in a patriarchal society. In my opinion, the double standard of the sex role socialization and specificly, the socialization into sport, manifests itself in the culture of women and in the way women experience, relate to, and participate in sport. In the following pages, I attempt to exemplify this by using empirical data from research studies made in Norway.
KARI FASTING
362
they are suppressed. Women may even be suppressed without knowing it. We have “learned” and internalized that certain sports The Norwegian Confederation of Sport con- drsctplines do not fit us, or are harmful to sists of about forty-five different mdrvidual our bodies (e.g., Eichler: The sex role socialsport federations. In 1983, thirty-five percent ization has been successful). Empirical data of the members were women. Today, female from a Norwegian study among thirty year membership has increased to forty percent. old married women and men m Oslo may This is a quite high percentage compared to illustrate this. The participants were asked to many other countries, and probably effected score eighteen individual sports as to whethby the Equal Rights Act, which was passed in er “they thought the sports were most suit1979. In some sports, women account for able for females, for males, or for both more than fifty percent of the membership. sexes.” About eighty-two percent of both males The largest ones are gymnastics (eighty-five percent), equitation (seventy-three percent), and females answered that they thought and European handball (sixty-six percent). wrestling was most suitable for males. About These figures reflect which sports society has seventy percent of both sexes had the same accepted as appropriate for females. Since it opinion about weightlifting. 1s men who have had the leading admmutraAnother interesting result in this study tive positions in the sports organizations, it 1s was that women seemed to be more positive men who have decided which activities are to men’s participation in typical female acsuitable for women. Every time women have tivities, than both men and women were to attempted to participate m a “new” sport, female participation m traditional male they have been denied participation. sports. Sixty-five percent of all females, for Different arguments have been used, example, answered that jazz-gymnastics was mostly physiological and medical m characsuitable for both sexes. The percentage ter. Men have been especially concerned among men was forty-eight. Corresponding about the effects of physical exercise and results for ballet were seventy-six percent and training on females’ reproductive organs. fifty-six percent. Men in Norway and elsewhere continue to “Participation in sport will mascuhnize feuse these arguments in spite of the fact, that males and is therefore valued negatively.” the American Association for Sport Medi- This statement has often been pronounced, cine claimed as early as 1964, that there were especially by males. It is important to focus no medical or physiological reasons for not on the fact that masculine and feminine beletting females take part in the same sport havior are culturally bound. The concepts disciplines as males (Joint Committee of are therefore extremely resistant to change American Associatron for Health, Physical (Dorothy Harris, 1981a). Education and Recreation, 1964). Today, In recent years, other types of arguments some medical doctors claim that females are have been used when females have tried to better suited, physiologically and psychologextend their partrcrpatton in sports. These arically than men for long endurance training guments have been of a practical and techni(Elizabeth Ferris, 1979). This does not neces- cal character. History has already proven, sarily mean that women should participate m that many of them had no basis in reality exactly the same sports as males do, not at (Gerd von der Lrppe, 1982). A good example is the development of female soccer in Norall. The point is, however, that when females m 1980 were not allowed to run 3000 metres way. Women were excluded from this sport until 1976. Arguments used against female at the Olympic Games, because “it was too strenuous for women,” this argument had no soccer were connected to physiology (harmful towards women’s bodies) and practical basis m modern medical science (Ferris, conditions (lack of soccer fields-it would be 1980). The Olympic Committee which made the a disaster for soccer [read men’s] if women decision, consists exclusively of older men. too should occupy the soccer fields). Today, What is important then is that women are soccer is one of the largest female sports in not allowed to decide about their own lives Norway. More precisely, soccer IS favoured and bodies, and they cannot freely choose fourth after gymnastics, skung, and European handball their own actrvitres m which to participate. Soccer has therefore had a dramatic One may therefore state that in this matter NORWEGIAN WOMEN’S INVOLVEMENT IN SPORT
Sport and Women’s Culture
growth during the last few years. The same thing has occurred in Sweden, where it has become the second largest sport. The fantastic growth of women’s participation in soccer in Scandinavia is a good example of what changes may occur when women no longer are excluded from a sport. Until recently, soccer was regarded as a typical “masculine sport.” The fact that eighty-five percent of the males and eight-two percent of the females m the study mentioned above answered that soccer is suitable for both sexes, shows that rapid changes concerning people’s attitudes to women’s participation in a particular sports discipline may occur under certain circumstances. I think the reasons for the positive development of women’s soccer in Norway should be analyzed. The very strong and excellent female leader and the strong female committee working within the soccer association, were extremely important factors. These women have worked systematically to promote soccer for girls and women, and educate female soccer coaches and female soccer sportleaders. A study carried out in 1983 among all the individual sport federations, showed that women were underrepresented in sporting roles such as referees, coaches, and so forth (Kari Fasting, 1984). In Table 1, all the individual sport federations are assembled. We notice the discrepancy between female active members and the other sporting roles. Among all coaches responsible for the toplevel athletes in Norway, only seven percent were females. In Table 2, the five largest individual sports federations m Norway are presented. The table shows the percentage of female members on executive boards, the percentage of women who attended the last General Assembly, and so forth. One can see that, compared to the percentage of member-
363
ships, women are underrepresented in all categories. This is true even for sports where more than fifty percent of the active members are women. As in other countries, the sports organizations are ruled by men. Someone may ask if this makes any difference. The way the picture looks today, one may say that the sports organizations, even traditional female sports such as gymnastics, reinforce the general pattern found in a patriarchy. The Confederation of Sport is the largest voluntary association in Norway. Recreational sport and outdoor life also play an important part m the Norwegian’s way of living. The fact that even female sports are ruled by men is therefore detrimental to the development of a future non-patriarchal society. This picture of the sports organizations is a mirror of society in general. As an effect of women’s and men’s different socializations, few powerful leadership positions are held by women. Even though legislation guarantees women and men equal rights, it seems to be more difficult for women to enter powerful leadership positions. According to Helga Marie Hernes (1982), women and men will never be equally situated as long as girls’ socialization is directed towards the private sphere. She states that women’s underrepresentation may be explained as a natural and logical consequence of the female’s situation in the past, where women systematically were excluded from public life and leadership positions. This opinion seems, however, to be institutionally rooted and developed as a part of our collective consciousness.’ ‘This seems to be the same phenomenon as stated by Margrlt Elchler (1977) when she writes about the “Successful sex role soclahzatlon,” which means that “its mamfestations seem Just natural to the people affected by It ”
T’able 1 Overvxw of women’s posItIons m the 41 mdlvldual sport federations 1983 Posltions Active Parttclpatmg Members Partlclpants at the Federation’s General Assembly Members of the Boards of the Federations Members of Committees Coaches at Higher Levels Referees at Higher Levels
Percent 35 19 15 II 12 7
364
KARIFASTING Table 2 Women partrcrpants m the 5 largest mdrvrdual sport federattons (m percent) Indtvldual Federation Soccer Sknng Gymnastrcs Track & Fteld European Handball
Members of the Boards
Participants at the General Assembly 1983
Members of Commtttees
14 36 85 41
0 11 50 8
2 2 58 18
7 2 42 12
66
30
10
10
Parttctpatmg Members
Consequently, one can question female leaders actual possibilities for demonstrating power (Hernes, 1982). Keeping this in mind, a study was set up at the General Assembly of the Norwegian Confederation of Sport in 1984 (Kari Fasting and Mari-Kristin Sisjord, 1986). Based on the general assumption that persons talking a lot at a meeting have greater influence than individuals who are less active in discussions, combined with studies showing that men tend to talk more than women when both are participants m group interaction, the main question m the study was: Do female sports leaders have power and influence on the future development of sports? The following hypotheses were put forward: 1. Proportionally more men than women give speeches. 2. On the average, men talk more than women, both regarding the number of speeches and the time spent on each of them. 3. Women’s and men’s contributions to the debates vary with the different issues. The main results of the study, are presented in Figure 1. At the bottom of the figure is shown the distribution between female and male memberships, forty percent women and sixty percent men. The next stage presents the distribution between the sexes at the General Assembly, twenty-five percent and seventy-five percent. Stage 3 shows the percentage of women’s and men’s participation in debates. The women’s part has decreased to twenty-one percent. The female delegates part of the total sum of all contributions, was only thirteen percent which is visualized at the top of Figure 1. It should also be mentioned that on the issues where women did participate, they
gave fewer speeches than men. Female speeches were in a majority on only one issue. Not surprisingly, the issue in question was children’s sport. The authors concluded that there were five relationships which indicated that women’s influence in the Confederation of Sport was insignificant (Fasting and Sisjord, 1986). 1. The under representation of women at the General Assembly. 2. The assumption that there exists a positive relationship between verbal behavior, power, and influence. 3. The assumption that women are paid less attention than men.
%
0
1
rsp
100
DELEGATES I
H
WOMEN
I
MEN
Fig 1 Women’s and men’s degree of parttcrpatron at the__General Assembly of the Norwegian Confederatron of sport, 1984
Sport and Women’s Culture
4. Women’s lack of contribution to central issues. 5. Women’s low verbal participation at the General Assembly.
365
difficult to get away from home,” “I’m too tired due to other obligations” and “The children require me to be around all the time.” FUTURE APPROACHES
So far, only empirical data from organized sport have been presented. In the study among thirty year old married women and men in Oslo (Kari Fasting, 1984) fifty-four percent of the women were physically active in their leisure time. To be defined as physically active, one had to exercise regularly, at least once a week. The corresponding percentage among men was sixty-seven. When the participants were asked if they had competed in any sports during the last year, the percentage dropped to respectively six and thirty-eight. This indicates a low interest for competitive sport among women, which again is a result of the sex role socialization. In analyzing the data from this research project, another interesting phenomenon was discovered. Very few of the female participants were members of a sports club. Altogether twenty-two percent of all women and fifty-four percent of all men were members. Among people defined as physically active, only thirty percent of the women were members of a sports club. The corresponding percentage among males was seventy. One may question why so few women who exercise are members of sports club. My assumption is that a sports club which is dominated by male leaders, does not offer activities organized in a way that are attractive to women. The male dominated sports clubs do not fit the culture of women, simply because they do not have the qualifications required to fulfil women’s needs and wishes. As a result of the sexual division of labour women have, compared to men, less free time to their own disposal. Even the concept of leisure does not fit the culture of women, because leisure often has been defined as “free time from work and other obligations” (Joffre Dumazedier, 1967; Stanley Parker, 1971). The fact that women have little time at their own disposal will naturally influence their involvement in sports. This is also reflected in the answers that women often give as reasons for not participating. In the study among thirty year old women, the most common answers to the question “Why don’t you exercise regularly?” were as follows: “I give priority to the family,” “I’m too lazy,” “It’s
Live Brekke and Runa Haukaa (1980) identify three different approaches in the debate concerning changes in society towards greater liberation for women. These are: 1. Women become more and more like men. 2. Women preserve and develop what have been identified as typically female characteristics and activities. 3. The androgynous person becomes the normative objective. In the last section of the article, I will discuss these three approaches in relation to women and sport. The first approach implies that women are given the same opportunities as men concerning sport participation. They will be allowed to compete in sports from which they are excluded today. They will get the same amount of money, as well qualified coaches as men, the sports will be played by the same rules as for men and so forth. This approach therefore means equality on men’s terms. If more women are to be attracted to sports (men’s sport), it would be easier for them if they became more like men. As a consequence, those values that dominate both the male culture and the sport culture today, will be internalized in a future female sport culture. If such a change should take place, it might probably be as an effect of a larger change in society in general, where the female gender role moves towards the traditional male gender role. Neither sport behavior, nor the way it is organized today, necessarily have to change. Men will, in the future continue to hold the most important positions in the sports organizations. Women will, however, gradually take over some of these leading positions. But, history has shown that this will take many, many years. The question is therefore, will women be satisfied with such a development? A development, which implies that they have to participate in a sport organized by and for males, and at the same time have few opportunities to influence the future development of sports. A consequence of the second approach may be a change in sports itself as well as the
KARIFASTING
366
way it is organized. One may of course question if sports, which is so centered around achievement and competition, can be mfluenced by dominant values in the culture of women. On the other hand, there are probably none who would not agree to the fact that sport competitions can take place in another atmosphere than the one which is illustrated by the slogan “winnmg isn’t everything, it’s the only thing.” A natural consequence of the change in sports would be sex-separated sports organizations, at least for a certain period. This change implies that important ideological aspects of the traditional female role may be preserved and further developed. It does not mean a status quo of the gender roles in society. A development and a change is necessary if women are going to have the opportunity to develop their own sports. It 1s difficult to separate the first and the second approaches and the distmction may, m practice, appear insignificant. The thud approach may, however, be considered a compromise between the other two. Androgynous sport will, according to Mary Duquin (1978), be a sport which realizes the values of both process and product. In addition to a change in the sport itself such a development also implies changes of the female and the male gender roles, if both sexes are to become highly attracted by sports. Since sports means male-sports, it is the women who have the best qualifications for changing sports in a more feministic and humanistic direction. Due to this fact, women must gam powerful positrons m the sports organizations. If this cannot be done through normal elections, special rules or legislation must be made. This practice is employed by political organizations as well as in the educational systems m Scandinavia today. CONCLUSION The Norwegian world record holder of the 5.0OOm and lO.OOOmrace, Ingrid Kristiansen, received only half as much money for her start in the Bislet Games last summer as the male runner, Steve Cram. This demonstrates that discrimination still exists, and that the best female runner m the world is not valued as high as the best male runner. Sportswomen today are probably better off concerning facilities, coaches, and other resources than some years ago.
Another development that has taken place during the past few years, is that women today are permitted to compete in sports disciplines and events which earlier were exclusively for men, like the 5.OOOm and the lO.OOOmrace in track and field. This demonstrates that we are moving toward equality in sports under the men’s conditions. This is a clear example of the first approach. Bonnie Beck (1980) states that the women’s movement and resurgence of feminism in the 1960s and the 1970s in the USA, changed the message, but not the result. Women co-opted men’s sport. She writes that women’s sport moved toward the male established, male defined, male developed and male governed sports. Surprismgly enough, this seems to have happened in a country where, at least in collegial sports, women have had their own organization (AIAW). She characterizes women’s sport in this period the following way: “Equal Opportunity, Separate but Equal Teams, ” “You have it and we want it,” “We’ll take one half of what you’ve got!” If we for a moment leave the world of sport and analyze the development of society in general, one may say that it is characterized by higher unemployment, more people who are starving, the chances of a nuclear war is greater than any time before, pollution is damaging the earth, and so forth. All this is a result of male politics. Many women all over the world question this development. It is almost ten years since a Norwegian female philosopher (Nina Karm Monsen, 1975) claimed that the masculine conquer philosophy had failed, and that society had to realize the importance of changing the dominating values and attitudes that exists in the world today. Should this discussion not also concern the world of sport? It surprises me that very few female scholars question the male development of sport. Even dominant socral scientists do not seem to question the value of female top level sport! A review of the literature demonstrates that “equality” still is important. But why should women run the marathon because men do it? Why should we participate m top-level sport? Do we get a better society by having many top-level female athletes, who have to damage their bodies to be the best m the world? Why is it so important to win Olympic gold medals? Isn’t it better to have thousands of women doing recreational sports? Wouldn’t it be better to have a
367
Sport and Women’s Culture
healthy body, that women themselves control? The reason why so few female scholars seem to question the value of the way sport is both organized and performed today has probably something to do with the ideology of the society, where, in some countries, as in the USA for example, winning and being the best in the world is very, very important, no matter what the consequences are. But has it always been like this? According to Ellen W. Gerber, Jan Felshin, Pearl Berlin, and Waneen Wyrick (1974) women developed guidelines for women’s sport as early as 1923 in the USA, which obviously had another ideology than the men’s sport. The following mottos illustrate this: “a sport for every girl, a girl in every sport” and “play for the enjoyment of playing”. It seems to me that the philosophy of sport at that time was much more in accordance with central values in women’s lives and culture. It is possible, of course, to play, and also to compete, and to perform without exaggerating the winning aspect, and especially the consequences of winning. History demonstrates that sport does not have to be so closely linked to the ideology of winning, as many people seem to believe today. It is also worth mentioning that there are cultures where sports are dominated by other values than in the western societies. In Chrna, for example, friendship seems to mean more than the competition itself. Even in some American Indian cultures, a player will stop the game if she notices that her opponent becomes sad when she is losing (Fasting, 1983). In her book Education for Peace (1985), Birgrt Brock-Utne asks the fonowing questrons: ‘Are we going to compete against each other like men do? Are we to copy men’s sports in the name of equality? Are we going to compete against men, maybe beat men on their own premises? Are they going to respect us if we run faster than they do? We have to ask whether we want to become better to compete, to take over men’s sports and men’s rules, to accept that it is fun to beat others, or to make men lose.’ (Birgit Brock-Utne, 1985: 144-145). Brock Utne argues that feminist sports must be sports without competition, and that instead of competition we should focus on sport and cooperation. In my opinion, it is necessary to change the
dominant values of today’s society. These values are strongly reflected in the world of sport. But how do we do it? How do we get organized? The question of separatism or assimilation in the way sport is organized is a difficult one. Due to historical and cultural differences, there are probably individual solutions for different countries. If Bonnie Beck’s (1980) analysis is correct, it may not be sufficient to have sex-separated organizations. pethaps it is more important to have human beings who are powerful sports leaders who really want to humanize sports? Women as a group, have better prerequisites and are better suited for this than men, in my opinion, due to their socialization, which has resulted in a female culture. It is these valuable female qualities that must be saved and developed, so we can create a better world to live in. As a consequence we must organize our lives so that women get into powerful positions both m political institutions and in the world of sport. REFERENCES As, Bern 1982. Ttlbakebhkk og stdebhkk pa begrepet kvmnekultur In Haukaa. R et al , eds, Kvmneforsknmng:Bidrag Td Samfunnsteorr. Uruversrtetsforlaget, Oslo Beck, Bonnie A 1980. The future of women’s sport* Issues, insights, and struggles In Sabo, Donald F. and Runfola, Ross, eds, Jock. Sports & Male Identrty Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ Brekke, Live and Haukaa, Runa. 1980. Teonn som inte firms Kvmnovetenskap~qt T&kr# 1: 30-45 Brock-Utne, Btrgtt. 1985 Education for Peace A Femrrust Perspectrve Pergamon Press, New York. Dumazedler, Joffre. 1967. ‘Ibwarclsa Souety of Lean? The Free Press, New York Duqum, Mary 1978 The androgynous advantage In bglesby, C. A., ed, Women and Sport from Myth to Reahty Lea & Febtger, Phtladelplua. Etchler, &rgtt 1977. ?he double standard as an mdrcator of sex-status dtfferenttals. AtIantLs3: l-21 Etchler, Margnt. 1980. The Double Standard Croom Helm Ltd , London. Fasting, Karl. 1983. VI har en tdrettsverden B vmne. K~errmgrad 9: 9- 13. Fashng, K&I 1984. Idrett-hvrlke hmdrmger mdter kvmnen? In “Kvmner og Idrett. Rapport fm Llkestdhngsrhde& kot$enmse 29 mar 1984 n Oslo Fastma, Karl and Ststord, Mart-Krrstm 1986 Gender, verbal behavior and power m sports organizations. Stand. J Sports SCJ 8.81-85 Ferns, Ehzabeth 1979 Sportswomen and medrcme I + 11. In Olympic Review 138/139* 249-254; 140: 332-339 Fens, Elizabeth 1980, July Atntudes to women m sport: Pmlegomem towam!sa soctologrCartheory. Paper presented at the Int. Congr. on Women and Sport, Rome Gerber, Ellen W., Felshm, Jan, Berhn, Pearl, and Wyvtck, Waneen 1974 The Amencan Woman m Sport. Addtson-Wesley Pubhshmg Co , Massachusetts
368
KARI FASTING
Harris, Dorothy V 1981a. Femmlmty and athletlclsm. In Luschen, G. R. E and Sage, G H., eds, Handbook of Social Science and Sport Stlpes Pub1 Co , Illinois. Hams, Dorothy V 1981b. Women m socletv and theu pa;ticipatioi in sport (11) Oiymprc Riwew 161. 163-168 Hernes, Helga Mane. 1982. Staten-Kvmner Zngen Adgang? Umverntetsforlaget, Oslo Jomt Committee of the American Assoclatlon for
Health, Physxal Education and Recreation 1964 I&erclse andfitness. JAM4 188: 433-436. Llppe, Gerd ion der. 1982. Likestilling i Idretten. I Llppe, G v d Kvmner og Zdnztt Gyldendal Norsk Forlag, Oslo Monsen, Nma Karm 1975. Det Kvmnelrge Menneske Femrnrstlsk Fdosofi Aschehough & CO , Oslo Parker, Stanley. 1971 The Futunz of Work and L~LYUIP Allyn & Bacon, New York