Unistudent500
Rookie
- Jan 19, 2021
- 24
- 26
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Thread starter
- #29
Hi everyone,
Apologies for the long delay in coming back and posting a results summary update. There were hiccups throughout the process, but the research has now been completed and submitted to examiners. Thank you again for those that participated, and the mods and admins for allowing me to post here.
What I am going to do is provide a simple summary of the results from the surveys that you participated in (found below), and when an article is written in the future, it shall be posted here so you can see the progress of the research. If you have any concerns or questions that you don’t want to post here, please feel free to email me at maccj014@mymail.unisa.edu.au
This research analysed AFL and Cricket Australia (CA) policies, Australian news media, and fans’ perspectives on trans inclusion in sport. To ascertain footy and cricket fans’ perspectives, two different but similar surveys were created: a footy fan survey and a cricket fan survey. The surveys were qualitative in nature, meaning fans wrote out their ideas, thoughts, and feelings in open-ended text boxes to question prompts. After cleaning the data (removing unfinished surveys) there were 123 footy responses and 97 cricket responses (n=220). The results from the surveys were complex and mixed.
In total, over 60% of fans surveyed shared explicitly negative attitudes towards the inclusion of trans people in sport. For fans that demonstrated positive sentiments towards trans inclusion, this was most often displayed as support for the policy changes that have taken place in the AFL and CA, and a desire for respect and inclusion of trans people. Some fans from this cohort elaborated that inclusion should focus on making trans people feel welcome, and implored sport organizations to do more for trans people.
There was a difference in the amount of positive sentiment between footy and cricket with surveyed cricket fans being more inclined to advocate for full inclusion than footy fans. This difference between cricket fans and AFL fans may be because cricket has a longer history of taking on inclusive initiatives, the contemporary work CA has done around LGBTQ+ inclusion, or the difference in rules compared to football (i.e., non-contact vs. contact—a point raised by a number of fans in the surveys).
The surveys differed from the news media as the fans demonstrated more diversity in sentiment and displayed more scepticism and rejection towards the inclusion of trans people. This was most often shared as concerns towards the inclusion of trans women in women’s sport (e.g., concerns around testosterone management and other biological and physiological factors), and at times, these concerns would be vitriolic and transphobic. The vitriolic responses would most often misgender purposefully, question the legitimacy of trans athletes (or trans identities entirely), or use slurs.
However, whether participants displayed positive or negative sentiments towards inclusion, most responses believed there needed to be rules and eligibility criteria for trans people’s inclusion in sport, especially for trans women. How these rules would apply and what aspects they would focus on differed, but many responses highlighted the desire for rules in elite sport and community sport (sometimes wanting them to differ, other times wanting them to be the same across levels), that focused on testosterone or other physiological controls (e.g., size, strength, etc.), and evaluated the genuineness or time of transition (i.e., whether it was before or after puberty). And while some advocated for limited rules, or no rules at all, others wanted sport organizations to form stringent rules that fell along strict lines of biological sex. What was prevalent in many of these responses was the belief that men are inherently better performers of sport, and that this needs to be controlled for trans people to be included.
In summary, while there was positive sentiment towards the inclusion of trans people in sport generally, and a smaller minority believing that sport needs to do more to make trans people feel welcome, there were also a great number of people that demonstrated scepticism or disdain towards including trans people (specifically, trans women), especially in football. And while most believed there needed to be rules in place for inclusion, some believed that rules should focus on sex and exclude trans people from playing in the category that matches their gender.
Thank you once again for participating and allowing me to share my research on this forum. I look forward to sharing some of the work that stems from this.
Apologies for the long delay in coming back and posting a results summary update. There were hiccups throughout the process, but the research has now been completed and submitted to examiners. Thank you again for those that participated, and the mods and admins for allowing me to post here.
What I am going to do is provide a simple summary of the results from the surveys that you participated in (found below), and when an article is written in the future, it shall be posted here so you can see the progress of the research. If you have any concerns or questions that you don’t want to post here, please feel free to email me at maccj014@mymail.unisa.edu.au
This research analysed AFL and Cricket Australia (CA) policies, Australian news media, and fans’ perspectives on trans inclusion in sport. To ascertain footy and cricket fans’ perspectives, two different but similar surveys were created: a footy fan survey and a cricket fan survey. The surveys were qualitative in nature, meaning fans wrote out their ideas, thoughts, and feelings in open-ended text boxes to question prompts. After cleaning the data (removing unfinished surveys) there were 123 footy responses and 97 cricket responses (n=220). The results from the surveys were complex and mixed.
In total, over 60% of fans surveyed shared explicitly negative attitudes towards the inclusion of trans people in sport. For fans that demonstrated positive sentiments towards trans inclusion, this was most often displayed as support for the policy changes that have taken place in the AFL and CA, and a desire for respect and inclusion of trans people. Some fans from this cohort elaborated that inclusion should focus on making trans people feel welcome, and implored sport organizations to do more for trans people.
There was a difference in the amount of positive sentiment between footy and cricket with surveyed cricket fans being more inclined to advocate for full inclusion than footy fans. This difference between cricket fans and AFL fans may be because cricket has a longer history of taking on inclusive initiatives, the contemporary work CA has done around LGBTQ+ inclusion, or the difference in rules compared to football (i.e., non-contact vs. contact—a point raised by a number of fans in the surveys).
The surveys differed from the news media as the fans demonstrated more diversity in sentiment and displayed more scepticism and rejection towards the inclusion of trans people. This was most often shared as concerns towards the inclusion of trans women in women’s sport (e.g., concerns around testosterone management and other biological and physiological factors), and at times, these concerns would be vitriolic and transphobic. The vitriolic responses would most often misgender purposefully, question the legitimacy of trans athletes (or trans identities entirely), or use slurs.
However, whether participants displayed positive or negative sentiments towards inclusion, most responses believed there needed to be rules and eligibility criteria for trans people’s inclusion in sport, especially for trans women. How these rules would apply and what aspects they would focus on differed, but many responses highlighted the desire for rules in elite sport and community sport (sometimes wanting them to differ, other times wanting them to be the same across levels), that focused on testosterone or other physiological controls (e.g., size, strength, etc.), and evaluated the genuineness or time of transition (i.e., whether it was before or after puberty). And while some advocated for limited rules, or no rules at all, others wanted sport organizations to form stringent rules that fell along strict lines of biological sex. What was prevalent in many of these responses was the belief that men are inherently better performers of sport, and that this needs to be controlled for trans people to be included.
In summary, while there was positive sentiment towards the inclusion of trans people in sport generally, and a smaller minority believing that sport needs to do more to make trans people feel welcome, there were also a great number of people that demonstrated scepticism or disdain towards including trans people (specifically, trans women), especially in football. And while most believed there needed to be rules in place for inclusion, some believed that rules should focus on sex and exclude trans people from playing in the category that matches their gender.
Thank you once again for participating and allowing me to share my research on this forum. I look forward to sharing some of the work that stems from this.
