Daily Bulletin


The Conversation

  • Written by Daryl Adair, Associate Professor of Sport Management, University of Technology Sydney
image

There is an old adage that sport should be separate from politics. The same-sex marriage debate in Australia has revived that view, as many sport bodies have publicly advocated a position on the matter.

To critics, this means that sport – whether via organisations or athletes – is taking on roles and asserting views that are beyond its remit.

Sport, they insist, is meant to be an escape from everyday life; embedding politics in sport deprives it of fantasy. More seriously, perhaps, “progressive” sport organisations are accused of engaging in a form of social engineering that deprives athleticism and fandom of their innocence.

In order to be valuable, therefore, sport must be a “neutral” space, eschewing all political judgements and asserting independence from external influences.

Sport taking sides

Australian sport history is replete with examples of organisations embroiled in political issues of national significance.

In the first world war, for example, the football codes variously supported or opposed the two conscription referenda.

During the 1960s, South Africa’s racially exclusive sport policies were made obvious in cricket and rugby: by 1971 the Australian Cricket Board had broken ties, but in the same year rugby union authorities invited the Springboks to tour.

During the 1999 republican referendum campaign, Australian cricket captain Steve Waugh and iconic bowler Shane Warne both publicly advocated for the “yes” vote, while Mark Taylor was noncommittal. A host of household names declared themselves “sports ambassadors for the republic”, but there were proponents of the “no” campaign, such as horse trainer Gai Waterhouse.

More recently, Australian sports have openly committed to a range of sociopolitical causes they regard as just, such as support for the Indigenous “Recognise” campaign and the “Pride in Sport Index” that benchmarks inclusivity for LGBTQI people in sport.

Like other areas of society, sport engages with day-to-day challenges of diversity and opportunity, whether that be for people with disabilities, those from non-English speaking backgrounds, or with women in the sport workforce.

Sport organisations pronounce core values and goals; the instruments to achieve them are policy. Policies are about vision, strategy and impact; all of that is steeped in politics.

Handpassing responsibility

To use a sporting metaphor, the Turnbull government handpassed to the public the question of whether same-sex partners ought to be entitled to marry.

The ensuing debate has been more than robust; it has often been rancorous. In an era of social media, the best and worst of people is magnified.

Some 765 organisations, from Qantas through to Coopers Brewery, have declared their support for the “yes” campaign. This includes several faith groups.

The “no” campaign is being driven by at least 30 organisations – in essence, religious conservatives that wish to preserve the marital status quo. The positional splits are shaped overwhelmingly by progressivism vs traditionalism and secularism vs religiosity.

For many large companies, though, the open embrace of gay and lesbian staff is normative. PwC, for example, reports that it has been “twice named Australia’s top LGBTI employer by Pride In Diversity”. For PwC, therefore, support for same-sex marriage is an extension of their commitment to LGBTI staff.

Sport and secular values

In recent weeks a host of major sport organisations, clubs and athletes have announced a position on the same-sex marriage plebiscite. The overwhelming view is support for a “yes” vote.

That said, some sporting bodies have preferred not to commit, asserting that the vote is a personal matter for individuals. Both of these stances have attracted commentary – which is no surprise. This is politics and democracy after all.

Pundits may wonder why, for example, the Australian Olympic Committee has not committed either way, while the Australian Paralympic Committee (APC) is staunchly for a “yes” vote. Both organisations are umbrella bodies for numerous Australian sports.

I have yet to hear of a sporting body advocating a no vote, though a few well-known sports stars – Margaret Court and Israel Folau – have indicated that position in line with their evangelical religious beliefs.

Australian sport organisations, especially those at the elite level, are secular bodies. This means their values are not beholden to religious organisations. They are hardly expected to discriminate against an employee’s religion, and they have no purpose to elevate one type of faith over others.

The same principle of inclusion applies with sexuality (even though sport, historically, has rarely celebrated LGBTQI athletes). What this means in practice is a secular workplace involving people with different, even competing views about wider social issues.

But, to use the APC as an example, it is at least clear to employees what that organisation’s position is on same-sex marriage. Much the same, of course, if they were an employee of a conservative religious institution. Fair call.

Authors: Daryl Adair, Associate Professor of Sport Management, University of Technology Sydney

Read more http://theconversation.com/taking-sides-sport-organisations-and-the-same-sex-debate-84575

Writers Wanted

Why some people find it easier to stick to new habits they formed during lockdown

arrow_forward

Why is it worth playing at an online casino?

arrow_forward

What is Self-Education? + 4 Ways to Improve Yourself

arrow_forward

The Conversation
INTERWEBS DIGITAL AGENCY

Politics

Prime Minister Interview with Kieran Gilbert, Sky News

KIERAN GILBERT: Kieran Gilbert here with you and the Prime Minister joins me. Prime Minister, thanks so much for your time.  PRIME MINISTER: G'day Kieran.  GILBERT: An assumption a vaccine is ...

Daily Bulletin - avatar Daily Bulletin

Did BLM Really Change the US Police Work?

The Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement has proven that the power of the state rests in the hands of the people it governs. Following the death of 46-year-old black American George Floyd in a case of ...

a Guest Writer - avatar a Guest Writer

Scott Morrison: the right man at the right time

Australia is not at war with another nation or ideology in August 2020 but the nation is in conflict. There are serious threats from China and there are many challenges flowing from the pandemic tha...

Greg Rogers - avatar Greg Rogers

Business News

Cybersecurity data means nothing to business leaders without context

Top business leaders are starting to realise the widespread impact a cyberattack can have on a business. Unfortunately, according to a study by Forrester Consulting commissioned by Tenable, some...

Scott McKinnel, ANZ Country Manager, Tenable - avatar Scott McKinnel, ANZ Country Manager, Tenable

InteliCare triple winner at prestigious national technology awards

InteliCare triple winner at prestigious national technology awards Intelicare wins each nominated category and takes out overall category at national technology 2020 iAwards. Company wins overal...

Media Release - avatar Media Release

Arriba Group Founder, Marcella Romero, wins CEO Magazine’s Managing Director of the Year

Founder and Managing Director of the Arriba Group, Marcella Romero, has won Managing Director of the Year at last night’s The CEO Magazine’s Executive of the Year Awards. The CEO Magazine's Ex...

Lanham Media - avatar Lanham Media



News Co Media Group

Content & Technology Connecting Global Audiences

More Information - Less Opinion