“Stepping Up” for Trans Inclusion in Sport

IF 0.4 4区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY
Lindsay Parks Pieper
{"title":"“Stepping Up” for Trans Inclusion in Sport","authors":"Lindsay Parks Pieper","doi":"10.1123/shr.2022-0027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Backlash against transgender (trans) people has notably extended into sport. Over the past two years, an unprecedented number of sport organizations have banned trans girls and women from competitions. Scholars from across disciplines have highlighted the problems with these prohibitions; yet, a look through the pages of our journals and our conference proceedings shows the invisibility of trans people in our field, as both actors and authors. As Sport History Review Editor Carly Adams points out in her 2022 editorial “‘Home’ to Some, But Not to Others: It’s Time to ‘Step Up,’”much of the work published in our field “continues to value and privilege certain bodies, voices, and analytic foci.” We have largely ignored the experiences and perspectives of trans people. I am responding to Adams’s call for sport historians to “step up” by encouraging us to be more encompassing and inclusive of trans voices. In doing so, I echo sport historian CB Lucas’s call for us to “bring trans and queer perspectives into our work” to recognize “the ways that queerness (in its myriad forms) pushes against, cracks open, and flat out refuses the binary logics of gender.” Political fear mongering and reductive understandings of sex have cleaved the rights of trans individuals. Our ability to provide historical context to inform contemporary conversations is, therefore, more imperative than ever. As scholars Leah DeVun and Zeb Tortorici poignantly argue, “History often lends legitimacy to a community’s claim that it belongs in the here and now.” We have work to do to ensure that sport history is a space for trans people. In writing this response, I acknowledge my positionality affords me power. Transfeminist methodologies encourage scholars to interrogate their identities and motivations when studying topics related to trans figures to recognize “unequal power dynamicswithin the research process.”As aWhite, United States, able-bodied,middleclass, heterosexual, cisgender (cis) scholar, I have navigated both higher education and sports with relative ease. It is unlikely that I will face backlash—personal or professional—for writing this response. I, therefore, hope to use this privilege to offer some thoughts on howwe can “step up” for trans inclusion in sport history. First, I offer responses to some of the obstacles historians encounter in studying trans history, then I use my own scholarship to provide examples of “cissexist pitfalls” to avoid. Some sport historians may suggest that the invisibility of trans figures in our scholarship stems from the contemporaneous nature of the term “transgender.” It is","PeriodicalId":42546,"journal":{"name":"Sport History Review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sport History Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/shr.2022-0027","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Backlash against transgender (trans) people has notably extended into sport. Over the past two years, an unprecedented number of sport organizations have banned trans girls and women from competitions. Scholars from across disciplines have highlighted the problems with these prohibitions; yet, a look through the pages of our journals and our conference proceedings shows the invisibility of trans people in our field, as both actors and authors. As Sport History Review Editor Carly Adams points out in her 2022 editorial “‘Home’ to Some, But Not to Others: It’s Time to ‘Step Up,’”much of the work published in our field “continues to value and privilege certain bodies, voices, and analytic foci.” We have largely ignored the experiences and perspectives of trans people. I am responding to Adams’s call for sport historians to “step up” by encouraging us to be more encompassing and inclusive of trans voices. In doing so, I echo sport historian CB Lucas’s call for us to “bring trans and queer perspectives into our work” to recognize “the ways that queerness (in its myriad forms) pushes against, cracks open, and flat out refuses the binary logics of gender.” Political fear mongering and reductive understandings of sex have cleaved the rights of trans individuals. Our ability to provide historical context to inform contemporary conversations is, therefore, more imperative than ever. As scholars Leah DeVun and Zeb Tortorici poignantly argue, “History often lends legitimacy to a community’s claim that it belongs in the here and now.” We have work to do to ensure that sport history is a space for trans people. In writing this response, I acknowledge my positionality affords me power. Transfeminist methodologies encourage scholars to interrogate their identities and motivations when studying topics related to trans figures to recognize “unequal power dynamicswithin the research process.”As aWhite, United States, able-bodied,middleclass, heterosexual, cisgender (cis) scholar, I have navigated both higher education and sports with relative ease. It is unlikely that I will face backlash—personal or professional—for writing this response. I, therefore, hope to use this privilege to offer some thoughts on howwe can “step up” for trans inclusion in sport history. First, I offer responses to some of the obstacles historians encounter in studying trans history, then I use my own scholarship to provide examples of “cissexist pitfalls” to avoid. Some sport historians may suggest that the invisibility of trans figures in our scholarship stems from the contemporaneous nature of the term “transgender.” It is
“加快步伐”,让跨性别者融入体育运动
对跨性别者(trans)的反对明显延伸到了体育界。在过去的两年里,数量空前的体育组织禁止变性女孩和女性参加比赛。来自各个学科的学者都强调了这些禁令的问题;然而,浏览一下我们的期刊和会议记录,就会发现跨性别者在我们的领域中是隐形的,无论是作为演员还是作者。正如《体育历史评论》编辑卡莉·亚当斯在她2022年的社论《一些人的‘家’,但不是其他人的‘家’:是时候‘站出来’了》中指出的那样,在我们这个领域发表的大部分作品“继续重视和优待某些身体、声音和分析焦点。”我们在很大程度上忽略了跨性别者的经历和观点。亚当斯呼吁体育历史学家“站出来”,我是在回应他的呼吁,鼓励我们对跨性别者的声音更加包容和包容。在这样做的过程中,我呼应了体育历史学家CB Lucas的呼吁,他呼吁我们“将跨性别和酷儿的视角带入我们的工作中”,以认识到“酷儿(以其无数的形式)反对、打破和彻底拒绝性别二元逻辑的方式”。政治恐惧的散布和对性的简化理解割裂了跨性别者的权利。因此,我们为当代对话提供历史背景的能力比以往任何时候都更加迫切。正如学者Leah DeVun和Zeb Tortorici尖锐地指出的那样,“历史常常为一个群体声称它属于此时此地的主张提供合法性。”我们有很多工作要做,以确保体育史是跨性别者的空间。在写这篇文章时,我承认我的立场赋予了我力量。跨性别女性主义的研究方法鼓励学者们在研究与跨性别人物相关的话题时,询问他们的身份和动机,以认识到“研究过程中不平等的权力动态”。作为一个白人,美国人,身体健全,中产阶级,异性恋,顺性别(cis)学者,我在高等教育和体育方面都相对轻松。我不太可能因为写这篇文章而遭到反对——无论是个人的还是专业的。因此,我希望利用这一特权,就我们如何“加紧”将跨性别者纳入体育史提出一些想法。首先,我对历史学家在研究跨性别历史时遇到的一些障碍给出了回应,然后我用我自己的学识提供了一些需要避免的“性别歧视陷阱”的例子。一些体育历史学家可能会认为,跨性别者在我们的学术研究中不被关注,是因为“跨性别者”这个词的时代性质。它是
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
16.70%
发文量
26
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信