Inclusion and Exclusion in Competitive Sport

Socio-Legal and Regulatory Perspectives

Seema Patel

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2015
• ISBN:
  9781317686330
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Law
• Subtopic: Media & Entertainment Law
• Index: Law

Society is obsessed with categorising and treating individuals and groups according to their physical and non-physical differences, such as sex, gender, disability and race. This treatment can lead to the inclusion or exclusion of an individual from the tangible and intangible benefits of society. Where this practice becomes discriminatory, legal frameworks can protect human rights and ensure that people are treated with due respect for their similarities and differences. In a sporting context, the inclusion and exclusion of athletes based upon their differences is often a necessary part of the essence of competitive sporting activity, arranged around rules and categories that can have an unequal exclusionary impact on certain classes of individual. Dominant sporting cultures can also have exclusionary effects.

This important and innovative book seeks to investigate the socio-legal and regulatory balance between inclusion and exclusion in competitive sport. It critically analyses a range of legal and non-legal cases concerning sport-specific inclusion and exclusion in the areas of sex, gender, disability and race, including those cases involving Oscar Pistorius, Caster Semenya and Luis Suarez, to identify the extent to which the law and sport adopt a justifiable and legitimate inclusive or exclusive approach to participation. The book explores national and international regulatory frameworks, identifying deficiencies and good practice, and concludes with recommendations for regulatory reform.

Inclusion and Exclusion in Competitive Sport is important reading for anybody with an interest in the relationship between sport and wider society, sports development, sport management, sports law, or socio-legal studies.

1 Key concepts

1 Sport-specific inclusion and exclusion

DOI: 10.4324/9781315775074-2

This chapter introduces the main concepts of sport-specific inclusion and exclusion, which are integral to this discussion. Whereas references to sport within social inclusion and social exclusion are focused primarily on achieving political and social objectives, it will be proposed that we shift the focus of these definitions from social to sporting, in an attempt to uncover their meaning and behaviour in the context of competitive sport.

This chapter will draw upon existing sociological definitions and carve out a specific meaning of what shall be termed ‘sporting exclusion’ and ‘sporting inclusion’. Since the heart of this discussion is concerned with managing physical and non-physical human differences, this chapter broadly explores these differences and engages in a sociological discussion of how these influence the processes of inclusion and exclusion. The social elements of these concepts will then be built upon in order to construct alternative definitions of inclusion and exclusion in the context of competitive sport, evaluating sport as a separate system within society. These definitions will underpin the following chapters and will be used as a benchmark for the identification of inclusionary and exclusionary practices in sport.

Inclusion and exclusion in human behaviour

At a human, basic level, we seek attachment and individual recognition through the formation of relationships and networks with other people or groups. Belonging to, and being with other people is essentially a ‘fundamental human need’ (Abrams et al., 2004: 27). This is reinforced by the work of Maslow (1943) who theorises that humans have an entelechy or drive towards self-actualisation which entails progression through the satisfaction of a hierarchy of needs. He posits that once the psychological and safety needs of an ‘organism’ have been gratified, the person will strive for the fulfilment of belonging and love needs.

This is supportive of evolutionary literature which considers humans to be ‘an intensely group-living species’ (Buss, 1995: 22). The groups which we seek to join can either be the dominant social, economical or political group of a particular area, social circles within a community or group, or specific activities such as sport. The nature of the behaviour and activities which take place within those groups largely influences and affects the level of inclusion (Abrams et al., 2004: 162).

There are a number of interconnected reasons why we may seek bonds, and why we attempt to obtain membership and access to groups. The central aim is to reap desired benefits, such as protection from perceived external dangers or from our own internal fears and insecurities. Another benefit is the feeling of recognition and acceptance of our differences. Throughout history, many individuals within diverse groups have sought acceptance and accommodation of their differences (Parekh, 2006: 1; Kymlicka, 1995: 3). We will explore these differences in detail shortly.

Human survival is considerably dependent upon our ability to collaborate with others around us. There are truly no activities which can be described as individual, and co-operation is almost a necessity. For example, it is suggested that, ‘small, co-operative groups have been the primary survival strategy characteristics of the human species’ (Brewer and Caporael, 1990: 240).

However, it is argued that actions such as co-operation, mutualism, altruism and self-sacrifice are overlooked within the evolutionary process, by competitive traits (Buss and Kendrick in Gilbert et al., 1998: 984). Within group living exists an ‘intensification of competition, risks of communicable diseases, and aggression from other group members’ (Buss, 1995: 22). Therefore, another way of measuring inclusion is by exploring and assessing the value of exclusion instead (Hague, Thomas and Williams in Brackenridge, Howe and Jordan, 2000: 19). To exclude or to be excluded is a natural part of existence which is not exclusive to human beings. For example, ecologists have shown that exclusionary practices are common within or amongst species as a means of competing for survival and existence (Smith and Smith, 2008: 261; Shanahan, 2004: 23). In addition, many species, including human beings, live by some kind of social organisation or social hierarchy that can produce conflict (Smith and Smith, 2008: 232).

Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection refers to the ‘preservation of favourable variations and the rejection of injurious variations’ (Darwin, 2008: 63). Darwin advocates that those individuals who were best adapted to their particular environmental conditions would have a better chance of surviving and thriving. This theory has been used as a mechanism for evolution and alludes to the well-known phrase, ‘survival of the fittest’ whereby the fittest will survive and the weakest will not.

It is worth clarifying the phrase survival of the fittest since it has powerful meaning in a social and sporting context. The ideology of a struggle for existence was introduced by early writings of T. R. Malthus in 1859 (See Claeys, 2000). The formal term was first coined by Herbert Spencer, a philosopher and founder of sociology (Spencer, 1868). He used this to explore how intra-specific struggle has resulted in progress. In 1866, Darwin used the term as a synonym for ‘natural selection’ and a metaphor for the natural world, which appeared in the 1869 edition of his famous works On the Origin of the Species (Darwin, 2008). Spencer, Darwin and A. R Wallace (co-discoverer of natural selection) added that this struggle improved species as well as generating new ones. Striving for improvement and competing for survival is significant to this discussion since it essentially underpins the essence of competitive sport as we will see. The theory of natural selection assists in the understanding of our human differences and behaviours, which will become critical to the analysis of inclusion and exclusion in sport.

In addition to giving meaning to the natural world, the term has also been applied to human beings and human society, often being used to describe and promote sporting activity. For instance, Darwin redefined ‘fitness’ as ‘intelligence’ and accepted the application of natural selection to humanity by others (Claeys, 2000: 240). Spencer used the term to explain social and political processes, arguing that a process of natural selection was evident in society also (Heywood, 2003: 54). The application of this evolutionary process to society, has been controversially labelled, ‘social Darwinism’. To be fit for purpose is to be self-actualised in Maslow's words (Maslow, 1943). There is debate surrounding this theory within the literature, given its connotations. It also prioritises self-interest over and above the human traits of mutual dependence, co-operation, collaboration and love (Midgley, 2002: 7; Darwin, 2008).

Despite this criticism, it is clear that human nature embodies elements of exclusion as a means of survival in society. It could be argued that the ‘human landscape [is] a landscape of exclusion,’ (Sibley, 1995: x) for it seems that ‘there is a natural or socialised tendency for us to categorise objects into “good” or “bad” as a basic condition for survival’ (Kitchen, 1998: 344). Exclusionary practices usually involve the isolation of an individual or group from a larger entity, whether in size, power or influence. The common theme throughout most references to exclusion is that it represents a barrier to inclusion because of a perceived judgement made about individual, socio-cultural or socio-economic differences (Hayes and Slater in Snape et al., 2003: 74; Long and Welch in Snape et al., 2003: 56). This can result in the exclusion of individuals from the desired benefits found within society, such as access to social groups, communities, the formation of personal relationships and engaging in leisure and sport.

Overall, it would be fair to say that both inclusion and exclusion are part of our natural instincts but are exercised in different ways and at different levels. Inclusion is concerned with membership into a group or community in order to seek acceptance of differences whereas exclusion is based upon a judgement made about a person or group's differences which is used to separate them and treat them in a different way. Human differences therefore play an important role in the processes of inclusion and exclusion.

Human differences

There are a range of human differences between people and it would be misleading to suggest that all of them can be explored here. Instead, there are three predominant, overarching categories of difference which tend to be consistent in the related literature. Differences can be understood as ‘individual’ based upon physical and non-physical appearance, ability and character; ‘socio-cultural’ based upon geographical and historical background and religious beliefs and values; and/or ‘socio-economic’ based upon status, wealth and class. Traditionally, formal and informal groups and communities have formed according to these differences or commonalities.

Individual differences

Individual differences tend to drive our categorisation in society, such as hair colour (Maslow, 1943: 390). Throughout this book references will be made to major individual differences based upon sex, gender, disability and race. These will be defined in detail in Chapter 2. These appear to be common markers for our personal or group identity and can encompass physical or non-physical attributes. A benefit to inclusion is that we are able to make sense of our own differences (Parekh, 2006: 142). Membership of groups provides a sense of fulfilment for an individual and can contribute towards defining one's personal identity (Rheker, 2000: 51).

Personal identity provides people with a ‘moral anchor, a sense of direction and a body of ideals and values’ (May et al., 2004: 207). The anchor enables individuals to identify with a familiar space and contributes towards the establishment of a rooted sense of belonging. Inclusion promotes a sense of collaboration, and when achieved it can be a powerful tool for the promotion of self-identity and cohesion amongst groups and communities. If we are included into a group or community, this can lead to the validation of a human being as a ‘person’ both internally and externally. Spaemann (2006: 2) explores the status of an individual as a person and argues that this personal status is dependent upon a ‘communicative event’. In other words, a person is not regarded as a person if they are debarred access to social recognition and interaction.

On the other hand, when we are excluded, this can lead to vulnerability, isolation and aggression (Abrams et al., 2004: 48). The practice of exclusion can lead to a sense of empowerment and authority over others. This empowerment may be false depending on the nature of the exclusion being exercised.

Exclusion on the basis of individual differences is evidenced by the civil rights era in the USA where individuals of black origin were treated as inferior to white people. Skin colour was used to restrict individuals in all aspects of their lives, such as the right to vote, and resulted in segregation on buses, in schools and in most other spaces including sporting activity. This exclusion from society was premised upon the misguided stereotypical belief that black individuals were somehow less significant. Adolf Hitler's Nazi regime in Germany, the Apartheid era in South Africa and the slavery of Indians during the British rule also illustrate large-scale individual exclusion founded upon human differences.

There is a clear human obsession with the creation of divisions between differences as a means of managing inclusion and exclusion. Barriers can form a necessary part of one's life. In fact, they are needed as a ‘point of reference wi...