Women in Sport

Housekeeping

• Next presentation is on Monday 4.27. That's Team 3--Sports During the Pandemic.
• After that, Team 5 and 6 both present on Wednesday 4.29.
• Please respond to the emails I sent to Teams 5 and 6.

###

Jane English

• published in 1978, a few years after Title IX
• she died in a mountain climbing accident the same year
• so no reply to critics

Background assumptions

• she assumes female athletic disadvantage:  "There are physiological differences between the sexes that are relevant to sports performance." (p. 355)
• women are underrepresented in sport at all levels

What is equal opportunity for women in sport? What would it entail?  Her answer:

1. All individuals, regardless of gender, should have equal chances to acquire the basic benefits of sport, which are: teamwork, character, health, self-respect, fun.  
2. Women as a group and men as a group should have the same chance to acquire the scarce benefits of sport, which are: prizes, records, wins, fame, income, etc.

Note: she is not saying this is the right approach to equal opportunity in all areas of life. 

How to achieve equal access to the basic benefits of sport for all individuals, regardless of gender?

• She doesn't say much about this.
• Perhaps what she has in mind is PE for everyone in K-12.

How to achieve equal access to the scarce benefits of sports for women as a group? Three-step recipe.

1. Gender-integrate those sports in which abilities are not very different--"dressage, riflery and car racing" (p. 357).  Flick Haigh article.

2. A. Gender-segregate most sports; after all, if they were integrated, most women would be excluded. As a result, women as a group would suffer loss of self-respect.  B. Give equal treatment to women's sports.

Top female athletes

3. Develop new sports in which women are better than men, so that women can be "best" and not just "best woman"; this would enhance self-respect in women as a group even more than segregated sports.

• balance beam
• synchronized swimming
• long distance swimming

###

Pam Sailors' Response (2014)

• She's the author of the article on cheerleading that said it's not a sport
• We read her article on climbing, in which she differentiated summitteers and mountaineers.

Her objections

Objection 1--No evidence that sports have any impact on self-respect for the women as a group (as opposed to female athletes)

Objection 2--Segregating by gender doesn't enhance self-respect

Objection 3--New sports won't help, because people don't want to watch them, have less respect for them.

###

DISCUSSION

• Discuss the three questions below about English's 3-step recipe for achieving equal access to the scarce benefits of sport for women as a group.   
• Discuss for 10 minutes. Pick a spokesperson to tell the whole class the group's thoughts on these three questions.

1. Step one. Do you agree that some sports should be gender-integrated? Is race-car driving such a sport, as Flick Haigh says?
2. Step two. Do you agree that gender segregation of sport is necessary for the self-respect of women as a group? Or do you sympathize with Pam Sailors' skepticism about this?  Another issue: are there better reasons for gender segregating sport than English gives?
3. Step three.  Do you agree that it's important for women to be "best" at certain sports, and that new sports should be developed for this purpose?  Or do you sympathize with Pam Sailors' skepticism about this?

###

The rest of Sailors' points

Objection 4--Automatically segregating by gender takes away a woman's choice to compete directly against men if that's her preference.

Objection 5--English doesn't consider the option of making team sports co-ed (aside from a few).

Objection 6--Women should have segregated sport as an option but should have other options.

Objection 7--English is assuming a gender binary instead of a continuum. This creates problems for athletes like Caster Semenya (intersex woman) and also for people who consider themselves nonbinary and not men or women. (NEXT TIME)

What should we do? Move to mixed competition where possible, taking into account:

1. individual vs. team sports 
2. direct (football) vs. indirect (golf) competition
3. contact vs. non-contact
4. professional vs. amateur

She's arguing for mixed competition especially in amateur, non-contact, indirectly competitive team sports. 

Gender and Sport--Background

Women in sports

• Women in the Olympics
• before 1900, Olympics are for men only
• women not admitted into direct competition with men
• men's events vs. women's events = "gender segregation"
• Gender segregation in sport is meant to protect women 
• compare race segregation, which is usually meant to protect a privileged race

• Women in college sports

• Title IX of the 1972 amendments to the 1964 Civil Rights Act (or just "Title IX")

No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance...

• Since 1972,  "female participation at the high school level has grown by 1057 percent and by 614 percent at the college level."
• Details:  US Dept. of Education  

An institution is in compliance with the three-part test if it meets any one of the following parts of the test:

(1) The number of male and female athletes is substantially proportionate to their respective enrollments; or
(2) The institution has a history and continuing practice of expanding participation opportunities responsive to the developing interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex; or
(3) The institution is fully and effectively accommodating the interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex.

• Mostly implemented in a gender segregated way-- men's teams vs. women's teams

• Our question (Monday): Should sports be gender segregated?  
• Monday's authors ask: Is gender segregation good for women?  

Policing the boundary between men's and women's sports

• 20th century: as women enter sport, there's a fear of male impostors who might try to enter the women's category (because easier to qualify and win)

• 1940s: female competitors had to have gender certificates
• 1966: sex verification process used "nude parades" in front of physicians and genital exams
• 1967: changed to chromosomal testing. XX chromosomes required to compete in women's sports. 
• 1985: Martinez-Patino case. Intersex Spanish hurdler, expelled, lost medals. Later reinstated. 
• 1990s: if athlete is challenged, then chromosome and hormone testing, plus pelvic exam and psych evaluation
• Most recent decisions (2019):  next Wednesday

Our questions

1. Should we avoid these problems by ending gender segregation?
2. If we should keep gender segregation, who should be allowed to compete in the protected women's category?  What screening process should be used?

Caster Semenya, South Africa (intersex)

Trans athletes

Rachel McKinnon (Veronica Ivy)
Masters cycling gold medalist (2018, 2019)
philosophy professor, Charleston College

Intersex background

• Being intersex is being born with a mix of male and female biological characteristics
• Must be medically diagnosed
• You can be intersex and not know it--especially in a developing country
• Intersex and trans are different things
• Common estimate is 17 in 1000 (1.7%); others estimate far fewer (e.g. 1 in 2000); depends what is counted as an intersex condition

Kinds of  intersex conditions--there are dozens 

• Complete androgen insensitivity syndrome (CAIS)

• Emily Quinn--TED talk (first few minutes)
• people with CAIS have XY chromosomes (like males)
• starting during fetal gestation, body produces testosterone but doesn't have normal receptors for it
• they have female-appearing genitals and have vaginas; they have internal testes and no uterus
• Sex vs. gender: Emily's sex=intersex.  Emily's gender=woman.
• Note: that's how she sees it, but in the philosophy of gender there is a lot of controversy. 
• Partial androgen insensitivity syndrome (PAIS)
• same as CAIS, but more muscle development, more masculine-appearing
• Caster Semenya
• Congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH)

• adrenal problem that can cause intersex condition in people with XX chromosomes
• body produces no cortisol and atypical testosterone 
• XX baby may be born with small penis
• cortisol problem and other issues have to be medically managed

Trans background

• Biological sex at birth is usually male or female 
• Language preferred by many: assigned male at birth (AMAB) or assigned female at birth (AFAB)
• They come to identify as "other" gender and transition
• Sex vs. gender (controversial)
• Language: cis means not trans

How elite sport has treated intersex women: the case of Caster Semenya (first 14 minutes)

br />

Team 4, Hockey

Slides
Nicholas Dixon, "A Critique of Violent Retaliation in Sport"

Fairness Issues

Housekeeping

1. There are no more readings or RRs this week, but the readings for Monday are longer than usual.  You might want to get started this week.
2. I will send a message to Teams 5 and 6 pretty soon, so we can meet and discuss your presentations.

###

Murray, chapter 5

Sports and Fairness (according to Murray)

1. Some sports issues are ethical, but not about fairness; they have to do with "what sport values" (natural talent, dedication courage)
• Doping
2. Some sports issues involve fairness/unfairness in a non-ethical sense
• Norwegians have an unfair advantage over Ethiopians when it comes to skiing because of climate and geography.
• Differences of opportunity due to differences of development and wealth (unearned advantages =/ unfair)
3. Some sports issues involve ethical fairness/unfairness
•  fairness in access to competition
• if there were no Paralympics, it would be unfair to disabled athletes
• racial discrimination forced black baseball players to play in so-called Negro Leagues 
• fairness in competition
• only fair to have same equipment
• Nike vaporfly running shoes
• light athletic wheelchairs in Paralympics
• Pistorius's blades
• all competitors must play by the same rules
• referees should treat both sides in the same way
4. Sports issue that involve both "what sport values" (natural talent, dedication, courage) and ethical fairness in access to competition and ethical fairness in competition
• issues about gender
• should women compete separately from men?
• should intersex women compete as women?
• should trans women compete as women?

Next time (Friday): background about gender and sport

Next week

1. Monday: Should there be separate women's sports?  
2. Wednesday: Should intersex women be able to compete against other women, despite possibly having some physical advantages?
3. Friday: Should trans women be able to compete against other women, despite possibly having some physical advantages?

Doping/The Olympics and the Paralympics/Fairness

Doping debate

1. Thomas Murray Position: Doping should remain prohibited. Argument: Because outcomes should be determined by natural talent, dedication,  and courage.
2. Foddy & Savulescu Position: physiological doping (moving within the normal human range) should sometimes be allowed, depending on the drug and the sport.  (e.g. EPO is ok in endurance sports, but beta blockers are not ok in boxing.) Arguments: 

• natural talents aren't sacred
• sport has to evolve
• athletes already take PEDS like caffeine and pain-killers
• sport is already risky
• open doping is safer than sneaky doping
• taking EPO is equivalent to accepted strategies like high-altitude training and training in a hypoxic tent
• doping is sometimes cheaper
• etc.

Other arguments against doping besides Murray's

1. Tom Hurka--value of sport lies in achievement.  Ebert & Robertson: a self-sufficient achievement is a better achievement.  Do drugs decrease self-sufficiency?

Next issue: "the category problem"

Ancient Olympics: all competitors in one category.  Winners are the best of the best.

Modern view: there ought to be lots of competitive categories

1. Olympics vs. paralympics; subdivisions within paralympics
2. Men vs women (we will discuss Friday)
3. Weight classes in boxing

Why is the multiple categories view the right one?

Murray's talent-courage-dedication perspective has trouble explaining

• "natural talents, dedication and courage should be the chief difference-makers in sport" (p. 72)
• Low hematocrit endurance athletes have to compete against high hematocrit.  It's legitimate that high hematocrit helps because it's a talent.  

High hemaocrit Finnish skier Eero Mantyranta

• Analogously????: disabled athletes have to compete against able-bodied athletes. It's legitimate that abilities help, because they're talents.
• How does he avoid saying this?  How does he support multiple categories?

Murray adds some elements to his view in chapter four

1. "natural talents, dedication and courage should be the chief difference-makers in sport" (p. 72)
2. Adds: competitions should be "interesting, fair, and meaningful" (p. 59)
3. Some differences are interesting to see play out, but others are too extreme
4. Fairness
• two sides must play by the same rules and with the same equipment
• like cases should be treated alike (Aristotle, but Aristotle did not apply this to sports)
• So disabled athletes should compete against others with the same disabilities
• Is this inconsistent with his emphasis on natural talents?

Other reasons why the multiple categories view is the right one

1. Sport as a human right
2. Access to high level competition as a human right
3. The chance to win as a human right

Disabled athletes and assistive technologies

Oscar Pistorius

Watch to 4:40


  


  Another video

A Limited Defense of Doping

Housekeeping

• No class Friday. Have a nice day off!
• Changes on syllabus.  There is now an RR for Monday.

Recap: Murray's argument

1. What’s valuable in sport is natural talent, dedication, and courage.
2. As much as possible, what’s valuable in sport should determine who wins and loses.
3. When athletes dope, doping can determine who wins and loses instead of natural talent, dedication, and courage. THEREFORE,
4. Doping should be prohibited.

Bernard Foddy and Julian Savulescu

 “The Ethics of Performance Enhancing Drugs in Sport” EIS 307-320 (or here)

Two ways of reducing cheating:

1. More surveillance and enforcement
2. Change the rules (F&S favor)

Is it absurd to think #2 is a cure for cheating?

Podcast covers many of the other arguments

ELUCIDATIONS PODCAST #65

Jot down points you want to make. There will be time to discuss after the podcast and also on Monday. We will also discuss the points in your RRs.

Podcast notes:

1. Q: Doping, yay or nay?
2. Is it unethical to allow performance enhancing drugs?
3. Should change rules and allow "physiological doping"
4. One, zero tolerance has failed --Lance Armstrong and other cases
5. Two, zero tolerance creates unsafe environment--no supervision
6. Three, zero tolerance gives advantage to rule-breakers
7. Four, zero tolerance bad for spectators--they don't know who's doping
8. Should be able to move within the normal range
9. Current rules stop people from moving within the normal range (or beyond it)
10. Red blood cells (hematocrit) -- moving within 40-52 is moving within the normal range
11. EPO is not unnatural, but caffeine (legal!) is unnatural.
12. WADA shouldn't care how someone got to 50 or 52.
13. Current view emphasizes natural ability, but shouldn't (see Murray)
14. Q: What should be banned? (6:40)
15. Physiological doping (moving within the normal human range) vs. super-physiological doping--they reject the latter but accept the former
16. Large doses leads to acromegaly
17. Sport itself is risky--much riskier than doping
18. So doping doesn't have to be perfectly safe
19. But very dangerous forms should be banned
20. Shouldn't entirely remove pain from sport, it's dangerous
21. But most soccer players are on pain killers
22. Q: Please clarify (11:50)
23. Not just acquiescing to evil. His view: "Nothing intrinsically wrong with doping." (12:25)
24. Sport doesn't have to be a biological test of genetics--that view has Nazi overtones. (compare Murray)
25. All kinds of interventions: coaches, strategies, radios...all overcome natural differences.
26. Doping is like taking glucose to maximize performance.
27. Testosterone enables people to train harder. (Steroids=testosterone)
28. Q: If there were more doping, would sport change?
29. Yes, but that's fine. (Compare Murray.)
30. Current values: sport is a test of pure genetic potential (he rejects)
31. Better values: safety, interest of the spectacle, fairness, should remain a "human activity"
32. Beta blockers are prohibited and should remain prohibited
33. Shouldn't remove fear and pain from boxing, because intrinsic to the sport
34. Sports would be better without zero-tolerance
35. Caffeine....
36. Q: If anything is banned, won't there still be rule breakers trying to get an advantage? (20:30)
37. Should put all resources into stopping "super-physiological doping" 
38. Q: Doesn't allowing doping restrict the freedom of athletes. Everyone will have to do it (27)
39. They already have to use hypoxic tents, high altitude training etc.
40. There's already coercion to engage in dangerous doping.
41. Q: Are you saying sport has to evolve? (30)
42. Yes. To be human is to try to be better, to use what you know to improve performance (rough quote)
43. Philosophical conservatives are attached to the natural or God-given (see Murray)
44. Philosophical liberals (like Savulescu) are not.  

Stop at 33.

Good Sport, Chap 1-3

Housekeeping

• we will catch up to syllabus soon
• I will make readings from Ethics in Sport available in case you didn't bring home (this afternoon)

Good Sport

Who is Thomas Murray?

• philosopher, bioethicist
• served on panels that govern elite sport like the Olympics
• has chaired Ethical Issues Review Panel at the World Anti-Doping Agency
• member of IAAF Disciplinary Tribunal

How elite sport should operate

• should doping be allowed?
• what kinds of new equipment should be permitted?
• when should someone compete in the Paralympics, not the Olympics?
• when should men and women compete separately?
• should intersex and trans women compete in the women's category?

Murray's views plus contrasting views in other articles

But wait...elite sport isn't operating at all

• Tokyo Olympics postponed, Wimbledon postponed
• Tour de France...discussing holding without spectators
• Topic: sports without live spectators
• Question: can sports have their full "meaning and value" if there are no live spectators?
• Is there a presentation group that would like to explore this topic?
• Let me know by email after class (by 5 pm)
• I will suggest some ways to pursue philosophically

Good Sport, Chap. 1: The Slippery Slope to Doping

Types of doping that are prohibited

World anti-doping agency (WADA)  list

• always prohibited
• prohibited during competition
• prohibited only by specific sports 

Lance Armstrong

• The Armstrong Lie is a good documentary that tells the whole story well.  Watch for free here (if you have time): The Armstrong Lie Watch online full movie 
• The Oprah Interview:

Lance's doping methods

1.  EPO (erythropoietin)

• goal: increase red blood cells that carry oxygen to muscles
• hematocrit=percentage of cell volume composed of red blood cells. Athlete wants 50% or better.
• method: take EPO pills.  Same drug used for people with many diseases (EPOGEN) 

2. Blood-transfusions 

• goal: increase number of red blood cells that carry oxygen to muscles 
• one method: A. remove blood during event, which stimulates natural hormone EPO (erythropoietin) to increase red blood cell production; B. transfuse blood back in 

***Natural alternatives to 1 and 2***

• genetic variation--you happen to have a super high hematocrit!
• training at high altitude--the oxygen deprivation causes the body to create more red blood cells
• hypoxic air machine and tent -- same effect without the trip to Colorado

3. Testosterone

• goal: bigger muscles, more strength
• method: synthetic androgens that increase muscle mass ("anabolic steroids") or natural testosterone

4. Other

• human growth hormone
• diuretics

Testing to prevent doping: how often, how intrusive?

• The Armstrong Lie: 59:40--1:05
• all the time, very intrusive

Good Sport Chap. 2: What Sport Values

What we value in sport: natural talent, dedication (in training), courage (during competition). 

p. 15

p. 21

p. 33

Foundation for all the arguments in the book

• Permitted = consistent with TDC associated with a sport
• Prohibited = inconsistent with TDC associated with a sport

Murray's approach is...

1. Internalist or Externalist?
2. If Externalist, which kind? (Virtue Ethics, Utilitarian, Kantian)
3. If Internalist, which kind? (Formalist, Conventionalist, Broad Internalist)

Murray's Argument Against Doping (reconstructed)

1. What’s valuable in sport is natural talent, dedication, and courage.
2. As much as possible, what’s valuable in sport should determine who wins and loses.
3. When athletes dope, doping can determine who wins and loses instead of natural talent, dedication, and courage. THEREFORE,
4. Doping should be prohibited.

Eero Mantyranta

• gold medalist with natural 68% hematocrit

Someone could argue:

1. Mantyranta's didn't earn the high hematocrit that helped him win gold medals in skiing.
2. If unearned advantages were unfair, Mantyranta wouldn't be entitled to his gold medals.
3. But he was entitled to his gold medals.
4. So unearned advantages are not unfair.
5. The only possible objection to Armstrong's doping is that it gave him unearned advantages.  THEREFORE
6. Armstrong was also entitled to his wins.

Murray's reply is....

• Which premise does he reject? (just one!)
• Why does he object?
• More on this next time, because next authors (Foddy and Savulescu) also discuss Mantyranta.

Good Sport Chap 3: Rules and Meanings

Murray: this is also the right framework for equipment and rules issues

p. 38

How to make arguments about equipment or rule changes

1. Sport X values this set of natural talents plus dedication and courage: _____. 
2. Equipment or rule change Y would/wouldn’t change the set of natural talents needed for sport X. THEREFORE, 
3. Equipment or rule Y should be prohibited/permitted.

Some equipment Murray discusses--

1. Klapskates, p. 40

What are they??? (follow link)

2. Pole vaulting technology, p. 40

• Does the new equipment draw on the same talents?

3. Swimsuits, p. 43

A new equipment issue--

Nike vaporfly shoes