Cargando…

Anti-doping sciences, abjection and women’s sport as a protected category

In this article we explore the relationships amongst anti-doping sciences, ‘abjection,’ and the protection of ‘women's’ sport. We introduce three novel concepts: ‘abjection bias,’ ‘abjection potential,’ and ‘intersectional abjection,’ as tools with the potential to provide greater nuance to und...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schneider, Angela J., Oldham, Alan C., Butcher, Loughran H. G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10244793/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37293439
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2023.1106446
_version_ 1785054723001286656
author Schneider, Angela J.
Oldham, Alan C.
Butcher, Loughran H. G.
author_facet Schneider, Angela J.
Oldham, Alan C.
Butcher, Loughran H. G.
author_sort Schneider, Angela J.
collection PubMed
description In this article we explore the relationships amongst anti-doping sciences, ‘abjection,’ and the protection of ‘women's’ sport. We introduce three novel concepts: ‘abjection bias,’ ‘abjection potential,’ and ‘intersectional abjection,’ as tools with the potential to provide greater nuance to understanding the context for these contentious issues in contemporary sport. The debate concerning participation in women's sport—especially elite sport—of people who do not fit within traditional definition of ‘women’ is increasingly fraught with acrimony with anti-doping sciences often recruited as arbitrator. With access to opportunities such as participation at the Olympic Games at stake, emotions run high in arguments that typically centre on inclusion of transgender and gender diverse (TGD) athletes on the one hand and protection of the women's category on the other. While sport theorists have begun the important work of identifying the roots of these problems deep within the structure of modern sport and society itself, they have hitherto paid little attention to the philosophical underpinnings of that structure. Through the lens of feminist critical analysis, we seek, in this paper, to understand the complex role of ‘abjection’ in framing the current debate in sport and in related anti-doping sciences. From a clear definition of abjection as a perceived existential threat due to violation of the status quo, we introduce the new concepts of ‘abjection bias,’ ‘abjection potential,’ and ‘intersectional abjection’ in order to understand and explain what in common parlance we might call ‘gut reaction.’ By looking at the few notable previous treatments of sport abjection and highlighting the historical connections between anti-doping sciences and efforts to protect the women's category, we demonstrate that this co-development is, in part, more easily understood in the context of ‘abjection.’ We conclude that the clarity gained can also help to shed light on current policy decision-making in relation to the question of protecting the women's sport category.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10244793
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102447932023-06-08 Anti-doping sciences, abjection and women’s sport as a protected category Schneider, Angela J. Oldham, Alan C. Butcher, Loughran H. G. Front Sports Act Living Sports and Active Living In this article we explore the relationships amongst anti-doping sciences, ‘abjection,’ and the protection of ‘women's’ sport. We introduce three novel concepts: ‘abjection bias,’ ‘abjection potential,’ and ‘intersectional abjection,’ as tools with the potential to provide greater nuance to understanding the context for these contentious issues in contemporary sport. The debate concerning participation in women's sport—especially elite sport—of people who do not fit within traditional definition of ‘women’ is increasingly fraught with acrimony with anti-doping sciences often recruited as arbitrator. With access to opportunities such as participation at the Olympic Games at stake, emotions run high in arguments that typically centre on inclusion of transgender and gender diverse (TGD) athletes on the one hand and protection of the women's category on the other. While sport theorists have begun the important work of identifying the roots of these problems deep within the structure of modern sport and society itself, they have hitherto paid little attention to the philosophical underpinnings of that structure. Through the lens of feminist critical analysis, we seek, in this paper, to understand the complex role of ‘abjection’ in framing the current debate in sport and in related anti-doping sciences. From a clear definition of abjection as a perceived existential threat due to violation of the status quo, we introduce the new concepts of ‘abjection bias,’ ‘abjection potential,’ and ‘intersectional abjection’ in order to understand and explain what in common parlance we might call ‘gut reaction.’ By looking at the few notable previous treatments of sport abjection and highlighting the historical connections between anti-doping sciences and efforts to protect the women's category, we demonstrate that this co-development is, in part, more easily understood in the context of ‘abjection.’ We conclude that the clarity gained can also help to shed light on current policy decision-making in relation to the question of protecting the women's sport category. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-05-24 /pmc/articles/PMC10244793/ /pubmed/37293439 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2023.1106446 Text en © 2023 Schneider, Oldham and Butcher. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Sports and Active Living
Schneider, Angela J.
Oldham, Alan C.
Butcher, Loughran H. G.
Anti-doping sciences, abjection and women’s sport as a protected category
title Anti-doping sciences, abjection and women’s sport as a protected category
title_full Anti-doping sciences, abjection and women’s sport as a protected category
title_fullStr Anti-doping sciences, abjection and women’s sport as a protected category
title_full_unstemmed Anti-doping sciences, abjection and women’s sport as a protected category
title_short Anti-doping sciences, abjection and women’s sport as a protected category
title_sort anti-doping sciences, abjection and women’s sport as a protected category
topic Sports and Active Living
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10244793/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37293439
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2023.1106446
work_keys_str_mv AT schneiderangelaj antidopingsciencesabjectionandwomenssportasaprotectedcategory
AT oldhamalanc antidopingsciencesabjectionandwomenssportasaprotectedcategory
AT butcherloughranhg antidopingsciencesabjectionandwomenssportasaprotectedcategory