The treatment of girls and women in sport is shaped by the idea that they are “less than” as athletes and as leaders, and thus the disparity in opportunity and social rewards is justified. Across the readings from this unit, you read and saw all the ways that girls and women are affected by the “less than” logic, such as (a) being sexualized, (b) being paid less because being “less than” detracts from their perceived athleticism or leadership capacity, or (c) being criticized, excluded, or fired for being too feminine or not feminine enough.
The Shaw and Frisby (2006) reading presented three frames of gender equity that have produced little long-term success in improving women’s opportunity and treatment in sport. The premise of the frames is the “othering” of girls and women in sport contexts, which requires that they must be granted support to assimilate into how existing structures are organized (power). Frame one holds that a woman can be prepared to fit in if she more closely resembles leadership stereotypes in sports (i.e., white male). Frame two holds that women’s femininity should be appreciated (as though there is one category of femininity and that traits strictly align within it). Frame three proposes that simply opening up spaces for girls and women to enter sport will rectify gender inequity.
Hints and Suggestions for Answering Prompt 1
You will introduce your review of Shaw and Frisby (2006) with an explanation of the “less than” logic, so consider the first bullet your introduction, which will be shorter than your response to the second bullet. In your introduction, you do not need to spend time writing on the reproduction of masculinity and femininity in greater society (as we have established in previous essays that sport is a microcosm of society); in other words, your explanation of the “less than” logic should be only around how it operates in sport.
Include in your response:
• An explanation of how the “less than” logic affects access and opportunity for girls and women in sport as athletes and as leaders; a segment of your explanation should include trends in media coverage. (Approx. 300 words)
• Based on what you read in Shaw and Frisby (2006) on the first three frames of gender equity (i.e., fix the women, value the feminine, and create equal opportunity), summarize each frame and explain why those strategies for gender equity haven’t been successful in improving the treatment of girls and women in sport. Consider using the lens presented in the fourth frame (i.e., post-structural feminism – disrupt the discourse) to support your position on the constraints on structural change. (Approx. 600 words)
Answer the following prompt:
Explain how orthodox conceptions of masculinity and femininity (as binary) produce and reproduce the idea that girls and women are “less than” as athletes and as leaders in sport.
The definition of gender identity is a person’s conception of themselves as either male or female (or rarely, both or neither). Gender roles, which are characterized as the outward displays of personality that reflect gender identity, are closely tied to this idea. Gender identity is almost always self-identified as a result of a combination of intrinsic and extrinsic or environmental elements; in contrast, gender roles are socially enforced through observable characteristics like behavior and appearance. For instance, if a person feels himself to be a guy and prefers to speak to his personal gender in terms of masculinity, then he or she has a male gender identity.
As time went on, the wall was revamped and braced by Hadrian’s replacements and turned into a long-lasting apparatus in the British commonplace scene; definitely something beyond a tactical design. Romanesque municipalities were worked along the wall arranged close to the watchman fortifications. The municipalities would be completely outfitted with shower houses, sanctuaries, and, surprisingly, full commercial centers.
In the cutting edge world, we don’t see Hadrian’s Wall as it was during the level of Roman rule, however obviously persuasive owners of the wall extra time made an honest effort to keep up with the “imagery and materiality of the Roman remaining parts.” The long stretches of the walls presence have permitted man and climate to destroy the wall so that its stones could be utilized to fabricate chapels, streets and farmhouses. Experienced planners have attempted to revamp the wall extra time and John Clayton is answerable for one of the most critical remakes. He bought an extended length of ranches along the focal part of the wall, and utilized the first stones that had fallen over the long haul to recreate it. Clayton likewise moved a large number of the occupants and networks that were worked close to the wall to areas further away in order to expand the walls perceivability.
It is reviving to know however that current Roman devotees can see a practically immaculate part of the wall among Chollerford and Greenhead known as “England’s Wall Country.” It is “a pristine locale of open fields, fields and lakes in the nation of Northumberland.” Chesters, a city about half mile west of Chollerford is home to one of the most mind-blowing unearthed wall posts. It promotes stays of pinnacles, doors, steam rooms, cold showers, the commandant’s home, and chambers where warriors loose. The most very much saved wall post in Europe to date is all situated at Housesteads in a similar district. The stronghold is looking like a square shape with adjusted edges, and “along its network of roads are establishments denoting the commandant’s home, regulatory structures, studios, storehouses, dormitory, emergency clinics” and that’s only the tip of the iceberg. One of the most Romanesque elements of the stronghold is the presence of lavatories; complete with wooden seats, running water, and a flushing framework to divert squander. England wouldn’t see these extravagances again until the nineteenth 100 years as Roman guidelines were not approached again until that time. Present day historical centers along the wall include numerous curios from the origi