Terms and acronyms
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) individuals are persons from either sexual minorities (i.e. with non-heterosexual orientations [LGB]) or gender minorities (i.e. with non-cisgender identities, an umbrella term for, among others, transgender, non-identifying, and non-binary/gender queer individuals [TQ]). Non-cisgender identities indicate that the sex assigned at birth does not match the inner feelings of oneâs gender identity or that one is not able or willing to fit into the binary gender system (Krane et al., 2012). Gender identity as âoneâs sense of oneâs self as a gendered personâ (Enke, 2012, p. 12) can â but need not necessarily â be expressed publicly, while gender expression refers to the ways in which gender is expressed and performed through âbehavior, mannerism, clothing, speech, physicalityâ and other aspects (Enke, 2012, p. 18). Neither gender identity, nor gender expression, nor the assigned sex at birth has to correspond to each other, which is referred to as gender non-conformity. The term queer originates from political activism â people who identify as queer stand up against the cisgender heteronormativity of society and against any discrimination in terms of sex, gender (identity), and sexual orientation.
A major function of the acronym LGBTQ is raising awareness regarding the concerns and demands of GSM individuals, but the various reference points already suggest that the subgroups face different realities and encounter manifold and quite diverse issues (Anderson et al., 2016). Due to the sports-related characteristics outlined earlier, this holds particularly true for sporting contexts, as research has revealed a different prevalence of discrimination and differing forms of discrimination between GSM groups (BraumĂźller et al., 2020; Hartmann-Tews et al., 2021; Smith et al., 2012). Thus, a differentiated consideration of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer athletes is needed to draw comprehensive and detailed pictures of their different experiences (Kokkonen, 2019). This claim is further strengthened by the fact that some of the groups themselves represent umbrella terms comprising different subgroups with various concerns and realities, such as male and female transgender individuals and femme- or butch-identified lesbian women (i.e. women who express or represent traditional feminine or masculine heterosexual stereotypes; BraumĂźller et al., 2022).
In addition, the terminology for discrimination against LGBTQ people needs to be reconsidered. Discrimination against non-heterosexual individuals is often referred to as homo- or biphobia in scientific papers (Anderson et al., 2016; Symons et al., 2017; Vilanova et al., 2020). The Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA, 2009, p. 8) defined homophobia as âirrational fear of, and aversion to, homosexuality and to lesbians, gay men and bisexuals stemming from prejudiceâ. Accordingly, discrimination against non-cisgender individuals is called transphobia, defined as âirrational fear of gender non-conformity or gender transgression, such as a fear of, or aversion to, masculine women, feminine men, cross-dressers, transgenderists, transsexuals, and others who do not fit into existing gender stereotypes about their birth genderâ (FRA, 2009, p. 26; Fischer & McClearen, 2020; Symons et al., 2010). Today, these terms are being increasingly critically discussed. Phobia refers to an anxiety disorder, so the use of this term can be understood as an attempt to put this behaviour into perspective. Besides, the term phobia neglects the behavioural and action-related dimensions of discriminating against LGBTQ individuals. Thus, it seems appropriate in academic discourse to replace homo-/bi-/transphobia with other terms, such as homo-/bi-/transnegativity, to make clear that such behaviour is not a pathological disease pattern but rather an open aversion to and hostility against LGBTQ individuals, which is manifested in discriminatory actions (Hartmann-Tews et al., 2021).
Theoretical perspectives
Theoretical perspectives in research on LGBTQ athletesâ experiences span a wide spectrum, ranging from the concepts of heteronormativity (Kokkonen, 2019; Phipps, 2021) and masculinity (Anderson et al., 2016; Vilanova et al., 2020) to poststructuralist and feminist queer approaches (Caudwell, 2014; Lucas-Carr & Krane, 2012) and minority stress (Baiocco et al., 2018; Hartmann-Tews et al., 2021) and multilayer (BraumĂźller et al., 2020) models. Furthermore, some studies have examined the intersectionality of GSM identity with race (Anderson & McCormack, 2010; Melton & Cunningham, 2012). The following section reflects on the most commonly used concepts and theories for studying LGBTQ athletesâ experiences and the exclusive and discriminatory structures of sport.
Concept of heteronormativity
As a social regulatory principle, heteronormativity provides the norms for gender and sexuality within a society based on three central conditions: the gender binary, the gender hierarchy, and heterosexuality. First, the concept suggests that there are only two genders, male and female, which are understood as being natural, unambiguous, and immutable and to which everyone can easily be assigned. Second, it refers to a hierarchical order of men and women, placing men at the top, as they are considered to âpossess physical, mental and social power over womenâ (Elling & Janssens, 2009, p. 72). Third, heterosexuality is defined as natural, with all real men being masculine and only attracted to real feminine women (and vice versa). These conditions lead to the marginalisation and discrimination o...
