Introduction

I thank the IOA very much for this invitation, even though covering the Status of Gender Equality in numerous countries and 73 sports in just half an hour is pretty much “mission impossible”. But I will do what I can and provide a very condensed overview of some relevant issues.

I decided to focus on Europe—a continent where sport is widespread—and cover some major gender-related areas: women’s participation in sport and the situation facing elite athletes, female coaches and female leaders. I believe that together, an exploration of these areas can contribute to an explanation of the status of women in sport as a whole. I will also refer to media coverage and conclude by making some proposals for action.

I will talk about general trends and use flashlights as significant examples. Of course, since you invited a sport sociologist, I will also discuss some underlying reasons and explanations.

Using the Eurobarometer on physical activity and sport, I can identify core countries in Northern and Western Europe with a relatively high level of gender equality in sport. I will take these countries as examples; you can take it on trust that the situation in the remaining countries is worse.

Sport is a gender-segregated world, but while the gender of sportsmen and women is always registered, it is very difficult to find information on, for instance, leaders and coaches.

It has to be emphasized that gender (in)equality is an issue in many areas of cultures and societies, and that the status of men and women in one area (education, for instance) will influence their situation in other fields.²

Women’s (and men’s) participation in organized sport

In Western industrialized countries, a high percentage of the population claims to participate in recreational physical activities. However, there are large differences depending on the sport and country, but also with regard to the age and gender of the participants. In all countries, women are—to a greater or lesser degree—under-represented among the populations active in sports.

General trend: Women are a minority in organized sport, but there are again huge differences depending on the country and type of sport. Social class and education as well as ethnicity also have a powerful impact on women’s membership of sports clubs.

The Eurobarometer data indicate that on average 16% of male, but only 8% of female, respondents reported themselves members of a sport club. These percentages are much higher in Northern and Western Europe.

Women’s disinterest in organized sport influences the recruitment of elite athletes, but also of coaches and leaders.

Flashlight: participation in football: women are still outsiders.

In Europe, football is the most important sport at both the grass roots and elite levels.

There are 53 federations in the EU and 12.6 million registered adult amateur players, of whom less than 10% are women (1 million plus)

The following examples indicate the large differences between different countries.

According to the latest UEFA report, the percentage of all players accounted for by girls and women are: in Norway 22%, Denmark 21%, Germany 15%, the Netherland 8%, England 5%, France 5%, Slovenia 3%, Italy 2%, Greece 1%—you can check the numbers for your own country. Germany has by far the largest number of female players in the world at more than 1 million, but Germany also has a population of 80 million.

Good news: interest in women’s football is growing: Around 20 million Germans watched the final stages of the last women’s world championship.

More good news: at the 1912 Olympics, women competed in only two events. Today they compete in every sport.

Gender differences: Elite athletes

General trend: In most sports and in all countries, elite female athletes are underrepresented in elite sport.

Exceptions: In some countries, girls and women dominate in equestrian sports, while there are also women-only sports such as rhythmic gymnastics.

The situation of female athletes is very diverse: some are purely amateur, others are fully professional, but most are in-between.

Flashlights:

Fig. 1. Under-representation of women in Olympic delegations—the Beijing 2008 Games

‍

‍

How did your country do?

The percentage of male athletes involved in all the above sports is higher than the percentage of women. However, two federations are lacking—swimming and equestrianism. Perhaps women play a more significant role in these sports?

In Germany, 44% of the around 6,000 top athletes are women. Females are a minority in most sports, with the exception of equestrian sports, gymnastics and ice skating.

In many cases, the gender proportions of the athletes resemble the proportions of male and female members in the respective association. That means that girls and women seem to prefer some sports and avoid others on both the sport for all level and the elite level.

Good news: Tastes can change! Take girls’ football in Norway as an example. More than one third of Norway’s under-18 footballers are now female.

Changes depend not only on the willingness of girls to engage in this sport and the willingness of clubs to let girls play. It also depends on the support female sport receives in terms of the allocation of resources, the establishment of structures, and the creation of a positive image.

Gender differences: Leadership in sport-related areas, organizations and

institutions

Leaders

The gender hierarchy in key executive positions of sport organizations has been on the agenda of women’s sport advocates for decades, without much success.

General trend: the executive boards of sport federations are still male domains; the president’s seats still have a sign attached: men only.

Flashlights: Gender relations in leadership positions

My research into 62 selected national sports federations in eleven countries and covering six sports revealed the following data:

Only 5% have female presidents

95% of the federations have less than 50% women in executive committees

Good news: The president of the ENGSO (European Non-Governmental Sports Organization) is a woman!

German Gymnastic Federation with 5 million members has elected five women and four men to their president’s committee. This federation is dominated by women, but the president is still a man.

Coaches

The situation with coaches varies considerably depending on the age and gender of the athletes/sports participants, the level of competition, and the sport. Coaches/instructors working on a sport-for-all level (e.g. in women’s gymnastics programmes) or with children are often volunteers or paid by the hour. Many women are engaged in these types of coaching.

My focus is on coaches in elite sport, because they alone occupy positions of power.

General trend: an overwhelming majority of coaches in elite sport are men. Surveys indicate that women do not train male athletes or men’s teams. This reduces their job opportunities decisively, since men train both male and female athletes.

Flashlight: Coaches in the Norwegian delegation to the 2008 Summer Olympic Games.

Eighty-four Norwegian athletes participated, 64% of them women. They were looked after by 33 coaches, of whom only one—the head coach of the women’s handball team—was a woman.

Good news: In Denmark, the legendary former handball player Anja Andersen is now an assistant coach to a men’s first division handball team (Viborg HK).

There are many more issues which I cannot cover, including:

• Female athletes with disabilities

• Medical issues such as the female triad (intensive training, nutrition, low body fat, amenorrhea, decrease in bone density), gender verification, pregnant athletes

• Social issues such as female athletes with children

• Dress codes: Muslim athletes, “sexy” clothes imposed by federations (e.g. attempt to force female boxers to wear short skirts)

• Sexual harassment

The gender gap: causes and explanations

The gender gap is universal (http://reports.weforum.org/global-gender-gap-report-2016/)

If we want to change the current gender arrangements and provide women with opportunities to “play with the boys”, we have to understand why women are under-represented in the various fields of sport.

Of course, there is not just one reason and there are no simple explanations.

At first sight, women’s roles in sport seem to be the result of their individual choices, but a closer look reveals that gender hierarchies are embedded in intersecting traditions, cultures, structures and institutions and interwoven into social arrangements and individual lives. Unpacking gender in the various areas of sport and manifold cultures of Europe will result in a bricolage: a puzzle which needs a good deal of work to disentangle.

When I refer to men and women, their opportunities, behaviour and decisions, I am talking about tendencies and averages. But we have to be aware that there are also major individual differences between women with regard to their interests, prospects, resources and so on. The same is true of men.

I define “gender as a process of social construction, a system of social stratification and an institution that structures every aspect of our lives because of its embeddedness in the family, the workplace and the state, as well as in sexuality, language and culture” and —most importantly—in sport (Lorber 1994, 5). Gender is integrated in identities, staged and negotiated in interactions. The current gender order provides “scripts” for everybody to “do gender” because gender is not something we have or are, but something that we permanently do. From this perspective, women and their roles—like sport and its organization—are not ”self-evident”: they are the outcomes of negotiation and both can be changed!

Women and men follow these gendered scripts and in all cultures acquire specific abilities, habits and tastes through life-long socialization processes. I will use two intertwined approaches to explain gender inequality in sports and societies: the distribution of work and the culture of organizations.

Modern societies organize work in a specific way. Starting in the 19th century, with the emergence of industrialization and factories, places of employment became increasingly distinct from homes and families, resulting in a gendered segregation of work. Men went out to work in offices or factories while women stayed at home and took care of the children. Housework was (and still is) unpaid and not considered to be “real” work.

These gender arrangements are integrated into discourses and practices legitimized by sexisms—or, better, biologism. Biologistic thinking refers to the belief that bodily characteristics (the female body or a black skin) are indicators of cognitive and social abilities. Thus, the biology or “nature” of women and men both legitimizes their positions in families, organizations and institutions and explains the unequal distribution of power in society as a whole.

Seemingly normal and natural gender arrangements can be unmasked by history: since the 19th century, we have witnessed the continuous “intrusion” of women into male domains from space flight to boxing without any damaging effects to either the participants or the sport. However, men seem unwilling to “conquer” female domains such as housework or synchronized swimming.

Even today, women continue to be more engaged in child care than men, and family responsibilities make it much more difficult for women to combine life, work and leisure. These responsibilities also impact on women’s opportunities to become involved in sport—as participants, athletes, coaches or leaders.

Leaders and coaches

Overview

Studies reveal that the gender hierarchy in executive positions is, at least partly, caused by various marginalization processes. Women who aspire to key executive positions are often labelled unreliable leaders/coaches and excluded because the men in charge assume that women will prioritize their families and/or cannot invest the time, flexibility and energy that seem necessary in important positions. Other factors which may also play a role are stereotypes, defence mechanisms (for example, attempts to preserve football as a male space), discrimination processes, and the reluctance of men to give up their posts.

However, there are also studies which indicate that many women are not interested in getting involved in sports organizations. The question is, of course, why not? Are the incentives (power, for instance) not as attractive to women as they are to men? Is the workload too heavy?

Does the perception of the “glass ceiling” preventing women from reaching the top impact on women’s willingness to pursue a career in sports organizations? Are they discouraged by prejudices, stereotypes, discrimination and an “organizational culture” orientated to the needs of men?

Theory and interpretations

Leadership

Studies on leadership highlight the importance of the cultures of organizations such as companies, administrations or sports federations. The culture of an organization determines not only the way people interact with each other, but also, in general, the distribution of work and the expectations which members and leaders have of each other. Organizational culture is created, enacted and also “gendered” via discourses, symbols, rituals and practices in everyday situations and relates to aims, corporate identities and modes of operation. Modern organizations emphasize equal opportunities, but they reproduce gender hierarchies via the notion of the “ideal leader” whose characteristics and behavioural patterns are derived from men’s capabilities and life circumstances. The gendered nature of organizations is thus masked by the assumption of a “disembodied and universal leader, who is actually a man, exposing hegemonic masculinity”. Women are marginalized since their aspirations and personal circumstances are not taken into consideration.

As research indicates, the “ideal leader” of a sports organization is a person with a long and continuing commitment to sport, with extensive networks, the knowledge and attitude of an insider, and a “demonstrative” investment of energy and time. Time and flexibility are considered useful benchmarks for measuring the quality of a person’s work as well as his or her commitment. Many women do not have long careers and large networks in sports organizations; they may also have difficulty attending long meetings at odd hours, and their abilities may not be suited to tasks which are “sextyped”—described in a way that addresses one sex, in this case men. In short, many women do not have the characteristics of an “ideal leader”.

Executive positions in sport are often filled by means of co-option, i.e. appointing a person by general agreement. Adopting the principle of “homosocial reproduction”, organizations prefer candidates that reflect the members of the group and improve its image and power. In a men’s world, women are different; they may even be regarded as “troublemakers”, especially if they promote women’s rights.

However, it must also be considered that in some sports (football, for example), only a small group of women are qualified and available for higher positions and that, as mentioned above, many women are not interested in taking on leadership positions.

Professional coaches

With regard to coaches, several questions emerge with “What are the reasons for the lack of female top coaches?” first and foremost. This question is relatively easy to answer: in most countries and in most sports very few women have the necessary licences. In addition, women who intend to work as top-level coaches encounter similar problems to women aiming at leadership positions: recruitment issues, stereotypical views of their abilities and so on. Another issue is the small number of women aspiring to coach at a high level. This is underlain by various factors, including remote career prospects. As surveys have shown, an overwhelming majority of female coaches do not want to coach male athletes—but that is where the money is! In addition, the thought of the working conditions—and, in particular, working in the evenings and at weekends plus the travelling—does not encourage many women to consider a coaching career.

In addition, women face considerable barriers during the qualification processes in place in most sports, given that training for coaches is adapted to the (sporting) biographies, competencies and (sporting) performances of men, as well as to male norms and values. Courses are mostly co-educational but the teachers are men, and many women feel marginalized in this male-dominated environment. Women-only courses—which have been run with considerable success in, for example, Germany—are perceived as being not good or “tough” enough.

There can be no doubt that, in addition to individual choices, discrimination rooted in the institutions and cultures of the various sports impede women’s access to, and advancement in, this field.

Sports participation, choice of sport, elite sport

Sports participation at the grass roots or elite levels as well as the choice of sporting activities depend on complex, interacting processes and conditions.³ On the one hand, there are the individuals—females and males—with abilities and experiences, emotions and motives, all of which are influenced by political, social, cultural and economic factors. Then there are the sporting opportunities/provisions, which may or may not meet the demands of the various groups within the population. People will take part in sporting activities (for example, football) when the activity is suited to their aptitudes, tastes, expectations and aspirations, and when it promises rewards. Sporting habits and competencies are acquired during life-long socialization processes influenced by the intersections of gender, social class and ethnicity. Here, both the environments (i.e. schools, clubs, peer groups and informal sporting spaces) and the policies of sports institutions are of major importance, given that they can provide options—though they may also impede access to sport-for-all and elite sport alike.

Sport is a gendered institution, and doing sport is always doing gender, embedded in gendered identities and presented as gendered images. Girls and boys develop specific sporting “tastes” and abilities which fit into the current gender cultures of their country. In recent decades, riding stables have become female spaces, while skateboard arenas have become male domains. Football, too, is in many countries a male space where women and girls—as “latecomers” and outsiders—are often not welcome.⁴ As long as football is labelled “male”, boys and men (at least those who are good at the game) gain self-affirmation, while female players have to defend their choice of taking up a men’s or even a “lesbian” game. But women’s growing interest in the game reveals the social constructions behind football’s seemingly natural “gender”. In many countries, women playing football (i.e. a men’s game) encounter institutional discrimination in the form of inadequate funding, infrastructure, administration and organization.

The conception of football and other sports as male spheres may influence women’s opportunities and decisions to coach, run for office, or compete at an elite level.

The selection, training and support of elite athletes vary considerably depending on the sport and the country. However, there are certain general trends and factors which contribute to the uneven gender balance in the world of elite sport.

Embarking on a career as an athlete and subsequently continuing that career or dropping out depend not only on a person’s talent, but also on decisions made by girls and women. Needless to say, their choices are influenced by institutional conditions, as well as by sports organizations and their cultures. A career in sport starts in childhood, and whether it is persevered with or not depends, among other things, on the support female athletes receive in the “elite sport systems” which seek to generate victories and medals. But do all medals and championships have the same value? And are women supported in the same way as men?

As already shown, using Denmark as a case study, the proportion of female elite athletes correlates with the proportion of female members in the respective sports federations. This means that there are sports which are not to the “taste” of many girls and women, which may explain the low percentage of women in elite sport.

In many (or all?) European countries, top-level sport is supported by public funds in accordance with criteria developed by sports organizations and the relevant state institutions. These criteria focus on the potential success of a sport and its athletes at the international level.⁵ In some countries, specific institutions such as Team Danmark administer the funds and work to advance elite sport. In other countries, the sports federations are responsible. Male and female athletes meeting the criteria are supported equally, at least in principle. Still, there may be cases of “traditional” (i.e. men’s) sports being prioritized.

Although the same criteria may exist for female and male athletes, the question is whether this “sameness” also incorporates criteria which are “just” or “fair” with regard to the specific needs of women?

A small-scale study in Denmark revealed that girls had a higher drop-out rate from competitive sport than boys, mostly because they decided to focus on their education. Although Danish sports policy aims at providing elite athletes with schooling, balancing training, competitions and learning or working beyond the sports arena is difficult and exhausting.

Athletes are also supported by sponsors (e.g. via advertising contracts), but there is no exact information available on whether—and, if so, how—gender influences sponsorships. Sponsors are willing to support athletes who demonstrate flair and successes, and good-looking women can make more money than most men. Here, media attention has a huge impact.

Professional sport

In many ways, elite sport is “big business”, and this is particular true of professional sports: football, motor racing, cycling and tennis. With the exception of tennis, professional sports are a male affair. In many countries, huge sums of money are invested in football arenas or racecourses, for example, which are built with public money but reserved for men. In addition, security for football matches uses up considerable resources in order to prevent fan violence. Why should the public sector pay for such measures in areas in which the athletes or players involved are men who earn millions? Why are these resources not invested in women’s sport?

Influence of the mass media

Studies in numerous countries indicate that female athletes get less coverage than their male counterparts and that women and men are presented in different ways. Globally, newspapers grant women’s sport less than 10% of their space. This low media exposure makes it difficult for female athletes in many sports to find sponsors, given that the latter expect to gain public attention via sports coverage.⁶

As the qualitative content analysis of the coverage of the women’s soccer world championship has shown, the presentation of women was mostly positive. And though there were articles that focused on the players’ appearance, the women’s game was often compared with men’s football. One question often posed by journalists was this: are they playing “real” football? This type of coverage clearly devalues women’s achievements. One needs to bear in mind, too, that women are a rather small minority among sport journalists.

The media shape the public’s perspective of women’s sport, and positive coverage of female athletes may thus influence girls’ aspirations to become athletes or athletes’ decisions to continue their careers.

Measures: how to overcome discrimination

There is only space here to mention some of the potentially numerous measures. Unfortunately, I have no totally new ideas or miracle cures to offer.

We must be aware that gender neutrality sustains women’s underrepresentation, meaning that if we do not focus on women, nothing will change.

We must focus on individuals, but a change in structures has to be given priority.

Public institutions such as schools should be used much more than they are currently to further girls’ sporting activities.

Raising awareness is necessary because too many people are still not convinced there is a problem.

Gender mainstreaming must start with gender-segregated statistics, since there are many areas in which no data are available.

“Intelligent quotas” could be a good strategy, meaning: quotas applying to the lower levels of organizations (the club level, for instance). Gender equality strategies would make sense here.

Incentives for individuals, groups and institutions to achieve gender equality may have a better chance of being accepted than sanctions.

Schemes such as mentoring and networking have been shown to be effective.

The exchange of best practices between organizations and countries has already begun, and should be continued.

‍

‍

1. This text is the manuscript of an oral presentation.

2. Vocational choices, personnel decisions and labour market structures are not “simply the expression of an economically rational distribution of people among the various occupations and jobs but [...] in the context of the ‘cultural system of gender duality’ [...] [must be considered] the result of complex processes of defining work and qualifications and distributing them among the players involved according to gender”

3. According to the German sociologist Klaus Heinemann.

4. A reaction emphasized by sexist and chauvinist fan cultures.

5. Sports federations may, in addition, invest in athletes in line with their own priorities.

6. Portrayals of players and narratives in the media do not provide glamorous images, although some female players were “gendered”, sexualized and commodified during the last Football World Championship. This event had a large audience, at least in Germany, which may indicate the increasing importance of women’s football. It remains to be seen whether this event will impact on the development of women’s football, at least in the participating nations.

‍

PFISTER Gertund, "Gender Equality and Democracy in Sport", in: K. Georgiadis (ed.), Ethics,Education and Governance in the Olympic Movement, 57th International Session for Young Participants (Ancient Olympia,17/6-1/7/2017), International Olympic Academy, Athens, 2018, pp.53-68.

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍