Version classiqueVersion mobile
OpenEdition Books

Feminist Success Stories - Célébrons nos réussites féministes

 | 
Karen A. Blackford
, 
Marie-Luce Garceau
, 
Sandra Kirby

Part I: Education — Partie I : Éducation

Gender Equity in the Canadian Sport Council: The New Voice for the Sport Community

Sandra Kirby

Texte intégral

Equity is an issue of democracy. Changes to improve equity and access must involve those affected in significant ways. (Gerd Engman, Sweden)
Equity is an issue of quality, excellence in sport cannot occur without equity. (Marion Lay, Canada)

Introduction: Readiness for Action

1This paper is about the formation of the Canadian Sport Council (CSC) in response to pressure from the Canadian sport community and the public to create a value based, equitable, drug-free sport system. Opportunity to create a more gender equitable system presented itself when the whole “amateur” sport system was thrown into an intense self-examination by the positive drug test of sprinter Ben Johnson at the 1988 Seoul Olympic Games and the ensuing Dubin Inquiry. A broad consultation process occurred over three years, concluding with the establishment of the CSC.

2When opportunity knocked, women and other marginalized groups in sport were well prepared and conversant with the equity issues. They vigorously sought representation at all levels of decision-making during the creation and implementation of the CSC. As a direct result of their readiness, gender equity was identified as a key value of a quality sport system.

3Sporting women have been active participants and competitors in Canadian sport for more than a century. Gender equity was one of the key issues initially raised at the 1974 first national conference on women and sport. However, a real opportunity to create a gender equitable system did not present itself until “amateur” sport found itself under a magnifying glass shortly after Ben Johnsons infamous positive drug test result at the Seoul Olympic Games in 1988.

  • 1 See, for example, the writings of Suzanne Laberge, Nancy Theberge, and Helen Lenskyj.
  • 2 I have been working for more than thirteen years on issues concerning girls, women, and sport. For (...)

4Prior to 1988, sport in Canada was not noted for its access or gender equity successes. The majority of women probably have stories to tell about their experiences with organized sport either in school or in community participation, which reflect poorly on the ability of sport to respond to and meet the needs of its female participants. Many Canadian sport sociologists have written extensively about the discriminations which occur within such a “capital p” patriarchal institution.1 Their critiques have generally been from outside organized sport...looking in. What this paper addresses is from the inside out, the author being one of several women active in the formation of the CSC.2

5The process by which the CSC was formed is presented in chronological order and an analogy to building blocks is used to show how the interaction of events and people produced a gender equitable organization. The keys to success in feminizing the Canadian sport structure include the early setting of feminist goals, the networking among women and some men within the system, and the readiness by feminists to move quickly and efficiently when the opportunity to change sport arose.

6First, a little about how sport is organized and the nature of the changes which have recently occurred. Fitness and Amateur Sport Canada was established in 1961 to do the following:

  • provide leadership, policy direction, and financial assistance for the development of Canadian sport at the national and international level; and

    • 3 Bill C-131.1961. The Fitness and Amateur Sport Art.

    support the highest possible levels of achievement by Canada in international sport (Fitness and Amateur Sport Act, 1961).3

7Although this mandate applies to both women and men, it would be difficult to tell by looking at the administrative and team development structures within various sport organizations. Sport has been remarkably successful for a selected population, so much so that, for the majority of males, it is remembered as one of their best childhood experiences. For the majority of girls and women, sport has not been nearly so positive an experience.

  • 4 Kirby, S.L. and A. LeRougetel, Games Analysis, Canadian Association for the Advancement of Women an (...)

8Currently, women are underrepresented at all levels of sport in Canada. For example, although we comprise 52% of the population, we represent approximately one-third of the registered participants in sport. Women are also significantly underrepresented in coaching, especially at the high-performance levels. At the 1990 Commonwealth Games, Canada had 43 male coaches and 3 female coaches in sports, although about one-third of the team was composed of female athletes.4 Such a small number of women coaches presents few role models for girls and discourages female athletes from coaching. At that time, all federal, provincial, and territorial ministers responsible for sport were men. With one exception (New Brunswick), the same was true for senior deputy ministerial positions.

  • 5 National Conference of Women and Sport, Government of Canada, Toronto, 1974.
  • 6 The second national conference was The Female Athlete Conference co-sponsored by the Institute for (...)

9Sportswomen, feminists included, have been actively seeking change in the Canadian sport system since early 1974 when the first national conference on women and sport was held.5 A second conference concerning girls and women in sport was held in March 1980.6 Some of the recommendations of these conferences were carried out, but many were not.

  • 7 Personal notes from the founding meeting held in Hamilton, Ontario.
  • 8 Canadian Sport and Fitness Administration Centre.

10Twenty years after the founding of Fitness and Amateur Sport Canada, and, as a direct result of those conferences, the Canadian Association for the Advancement of Women and Sport (CAAWS) was founded in 1981 to “promote, develop, and advocate a feminist perspective on women and sport.”7 Initially, CAAWS was an advocacy group outside of sport governance and delivery systems. CAAWS now rents space alongside other sport organizations at CSFAC8 and receives some operational funding from government.

  • 9 Lorraine Code. 1980. “Feminist Theory” in Burt, S., Code, L. and L. Dorney. Changing Patterns: Wome (...)
  • 10 Titles include Games Analysis, On the Move Handbook Adolescent Women, Women in International Sport: (...)

11As Lorraine Code notes, “Patriarchal societies are those in which men have more power than women, readier access than women to that which is valued in society, and in consequence, are in control over many, if not most aspects of women’s lives.”9 This describes the majority of sport organizations, and, hence, the institution of sport. CAAWS has struggled to change this and its identity as a feminist organization-moving from liberal to radical and back to liberal as the need for action dictated. Along the way, CAAWS has developed a reputation as a successful advocacy group. It has produced numerous written documents10 and worked towards increasing the representation of women and sport.

The Beginnings of Institutional Change: The First Four Building Blocks

  • 11 Sport Canada Policy on Women in Sport, Fitness and Amateur Sport, Minister of State, 1986: 6.

12The first building block is the development of a human rights context for sport, a necessary condition for feminist action in sport. Canada has a reputation as a liberal nation; in particular, the adoption of the Canadian Constitution in 1981, enshrined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, guaranteed certain basic rights to all Canadians. Of special significance to sport were the anti-discrimination and equality provisions of the Charter “which refer to governmental actions and laws which make clear that sex equality is not a privilege to be conferred or withdrawn at will, but rather a state that should exist.”11

  • 12 Ibid.

13A second building block was set in place when the federal government released the Sport Canada Policy on Women and Sport,12 which stated that

Sport Canada’s goal with respect to women in sport is as follows: To attain equality for women in sport.

Equality implies that women at all levels of the sport system should have equal opportunity to participate. Equality is not necessarily meant to imply that women wish to participate in the same activities as men but rather to indicate that activities of their choice should be provided and administered in a fair and unbiased environment. At all levels of the sport system, equal opportunities must exist for women and men to compete, coach, officiate, or administer sport. (1986, 14)

  • 13 This was later altered when the new Liberal government created a ‘super ministry’ of Heritage and s (...)

14Now, Canadian sport needed to find a way to use the policy to come into line with the spirit of the Canadian constitution. CAAWS was extensively referred to in this government document and its members were elated at the government’s commitment, albeit at the policy level, to gender equality. Sport Canada, for whom the document was prepared, was a government organization which at that time reported to the Federal Minister of Sport.13

  • 14 Diane Palmason was Manager of the Women’s Program during the late 1980s and left the post in mid-19 (...)
  • 15 For example, the Hall. A., Slack, T. and D. Cullen report on Women and Administration in sport was (...)

15However, having a policy and acting on that policy are two different things. Once Sport Canada had the policy, its Women’s Program14 gained a somewhat greater profile in the sport community and the nature of research commissioned by Sport Canada15 changed noticeably to include more issues of women and girls. However, there was little noticeable impact of the policy on the way in which the various government supported sport organizations actually functioned.

  • 16 Kirby, S.L. and A.J. LeRougetel. (1992). Games Analysis, CAAWS occasional papers, Ottawa.

16The dominant emphases in sport remained unchanged, those of maintaining a working bureaucracy with some clear lines of authority, decision-making, accountability, and producing athletes on an annual and quadrennial basis (Olympic years marking the end of each quadrennial). Despite the sport policy, the ratio of female to male athletes on national teams was 1:2; of coaches 1:9.16

17In 1988, Canada held the first international conference on drug use in sport and gained a reputation internationally as a leader in the drug-free sport movement. At the Seoul Olympics later that year, Ben Johnsons urine was found to have abnormally high levels of testosterone indicating the presence of the anabolic steroid, stanozolol.

  • 17 Sport organizations at the national level include organizations such as Judo Canada and Basketball (...)

18The Canadian government responded to the mounting public pressure to “clean up sport” with building block number three, the Dubin Commission, to study amateur sport and recommend change. The Report of the Dubin Commission was released in late 1989 and challenged both sport organizations17 and government to make significant changes in how sport was run. This meant looking at fundamental issues: ethics and values, equity and access, collective voice for the sport community, accountability, and government involvement in sport.

  • 18 Lorraine Greaves. 1991. “Reorganizing the National Action Committee on the Status of 1986-1988,” in (...)

19Shortly thereafter, government people, volunteers, and staff of the national sport community met in Ottawa at the Sport Forum (later called Sport Forum I), building block four. Here, in an effort to address the specific issue of drug-free sport, participants realized that organized sport was unable to respond to the changing needs of modern society. In the Task Force 2000 report (April 1991), representatives called for a Sport Forum II. They wanted a broader, more representative meeting of the sport community to create a more democratic and responsive sport system. Lorraine Greaves18 noted that, as organizations endeavour to increase their participation and positive public profile, they must become increasingly critical of their internal processes. Similarly, participants in the Sport Forum process were aware of the need for change and most welcomed the opportunity to completely re-evaluate sport.

20It is important to note that CAAWS was not invited to Sport Forum I. Throughout the 1980s, the relationship between CAAWS and Sport Canada’s Women’s Program had been an awkward one, partly because CAAWS called itself an organization that was openly and “blatantly feminist.” At that time, CAAWS was positioned outside of sport, and, although it worked diligently to bring gender equity to the government and various sport organizations, it was clearly not considered part of the sport community by the funders of the Sport Forum process.

Moving Quickly and Efficiently: More Building Blocks, More Interaction

  • 19 Sport Canada grew from 30 in 1970 to 121 in 1984 (Canada, DNHW, 1971-72, 1984-85) in Macintosh, D. (...)

21Increased federal government involvement in sport was reflected in the increased size of Sport Canada19 and of the national sport organizations. One of the outcomes of this was the increasingly complex relationship between government bureaucracy and sport governance by paid and volunteer workers from the national sport organizations. In May 1991, Sport Canada took a strong leadership stand on gender equity by appointing Marion Lay as Manager of the Women’s Program, Sport Canada, providing building block five. Lay was a medallist in the 1968 Olympic Games and a high profile advocate for women and sport. Lay resigned as Coordinator of CAAWS, moved “inside” government as the Women’s Program Manager, and took with her the CAAWS, feminist agenda as the blueprint for change. As a result, a strong feminist voice from government began working collaboratively with national sport organizations and with CAAWS. Sport Canada and sport organizations quickly began to make dramatic changes.

  • 20 Judy Kent, Kent Consulting, Ottawa.
  • 21 My particular task that weekend was to represent CAAWS and I volunteered to be on the team which dr (...)

22Sport Forum II, building block six, was held in October 1991. Lay ensured that four CAAWS representatives were present and CAAWS functioned as an equal among the Sport Forum representatives. All CAAWS representatives were long-standing members and active advocates in their various communities. At Sport Forum II, participants representing the majority of national sport organizations, multisport organizations, athletes, and special interest groups together reviewed, discussed, modified, and reached consensus on a) a new collective vision for sport in Canada, b) strategic directions for this vision, and c) a possible collective mechanism for sport. In this exceptionally well-facilitated meeting,20 Judy Kent ensured that every delegate had ample opportunity to express views on the vision, mechanisms, and action.21 Familiar with the aims of CAAWS, Kent and others encouraged participation of women in the discussions and ensured that the debates were held in a climate of respect and good will. A spirit of solidarity was actually palpable at the Sport Forum, as all members of the sport community were encouraged to wear “big hats”; that is, to give priority to the big picture of what was good for sport in Canada. This was no mean achievement, given the long history of competitiveness and territoriality among sport organizations.

23The impact of CAAWS’ presence at Sport Forum II was noticeable, particularly in the strength and visibility of outcome statements on equity, accessibility, and responsibility. For example, the Vision for Sport in Canada contains four critical points:

  • Sport is accessible and available to all persons in Canada;

  • Sport is based on and reflects fundamental values and ethics, including equity, collaboration, safety, and enjoyment,

  • Sport is participant-oriented and athlete-centred, and relies on quality coaching and support services;

  • Sport has a responsibility for promoting values and ethics;

  • Sport Forum II delegates also called for a re-evaluation of the sport recognition policy, a policy which gave Olympic sports greater access to resources than non-Olympic sports. Since women’s sport had fewer Olympic opportunities than men’s sport, this marked a potential advance for women. Also, sport organizations agreed to address equity and access policies and goals. Encouragingly, consensus and collective leadership figured prominently in the discussion about self-governance.

24Finally, delegates were unanimous in calling for a collective mechanism for the organization and administration of sport:

  • 22 S. Kirby, CAAWS Action Bulletin, November, 1991.

Such a mechanism would for example, establish a national forum for debate on sport issues and identify emerging issues. Since equity and in particular, gender equity are critical to the advancement of women and sport and physical activity, CAAWS is optimistic about the impact on women of such a collective mechanism for sport.22

25By the end of Sport Forum II, CAAWS had shifted identities from that of an advocacy group outside of sport to an accepted organization with legitimate concerns within the sport community. CAAWS positioned itself as a resource that the sport community needed.

  • 23 Government control of budgets (and hence organizations) was largely a question of the degree of dep (...)
  • 24 Success for Fitness and Amateur Sport Canada (the government) is still largely marked by the number (...)

26Building block seven, Sport: The Way Ahead, was released in April 1992. The federal government had been very much in control of sport budgeting and policy,23 but this long-awaited Parliamentary Committee report called upon government to take a more “hands off” approach to sport to allow increased private control over what had been defined as a public responsibility of government only 31 years earlier. Sport: The Way Ahead signalled an attitudinal change by government, dramatically reducing its role in sport delivery.24

  • 25 The International Professional Development Tour was co-sponsored by the Sport Canada — Women’s Prog (...)
  • 26 See the International Professional Development Report, The R. Tait MacKenzie Leadership Institute, (...)

27Building block eight? In May 1992, eleven women were selected for the International Professional Development Program tour (IPDP),25 and travelled to the United Kingdom, Norway, and Sweden to speak with women active in changing national sport systems. They met with sport and human rights advocates, politicians, media, government representatives, researchers, athletes, community centre programmers, and coaches.26 The results of the tour were many and varied. For example, Swedish sport advocates had concluded that a gender balance must be at a minimum 60% to 40% participation on gender lines. The rationale was that if women were 10% of a committee, they had a presence; 20% meant they did a lot of the work; at 30% men would congratulate the women on their visibility and at the same time subtly warn men on the committee that the women were getting too strong; and at 40% women started to have real impact on decision making. In Norway, the tour participants learned that women brought a women’s perspective to sport, that being women was the qualification they brought to their position. The tour returned to Canada with a collective voice and a stronger, clearer vision for sport including the knowledge that Canada would be called upon to play a significant and international leadership role in sport and equity issues.

28Sport Forum III, the final building block nine, fell into place. The forum met in early October 1992 and CAAWS and IPDP participants were present. This meeting included representatives from most of the National Sport Organizations (e.g., Basketball Canada, Rowing Canada) and multi-sport and service organizations (e.g., Canadian Commonwealth Games Society), government, athletes, coaches, researchers, and interested people from the sport community. The purpose of Sport Forum III was to finalize the structure and processes created by earlier Sport Forums and to give definition to a new collective voice for sport.

29The author’s role during Sport Forum III was to be a member of the writing group, a group which facilitated decision making in the meeting. Imagine a very large room holding 34 tables of 8 persons. Judy Kent, the facilitator, had overheads summarizing the decisions made at Sport Forums I and II and the decisions remaining for Sport Forum III. After discussion on a group of options, Kent would have the assembly raise a green card if they agreed with an option or a red card if they did not. On points where there was near unanimity, she considered that consensus was reached and the group would then move on to the next set of decisions. If consensus was not reached, the writing group would retire to prepare newly worded options. These would then be brought back to the assembly for red and green carding.

30The assembly struggled with the equity concerns. How would an organization get gender balance if an odd number of representatives was to be selected for future Forums? What if there currently were no women in a sport? For example, one man stood up to say that he felt totally overwhelmed and pushed into accepting gender equity because of pressure from a special interest group. A woman stood up to say she wanted to be selected only because she was the best person for the position, not because she was a woman. Another woman suggested that the fact she was a woman qualified her to bring a woman’s perspective into her organization and to the assembly. Another man suggested that participants were all very clever people and could figure out how to make their organizations more gender equitable. He further suggested that not having the particular solutions “at the tip of our tongues should not stop us from supporting the equity resolutions.” Evident throughout the discussions were the strong reasoned voices of CAAWS, IPDP tour participants, men who understood the need for equity and, in particular, gender equity, and, for the first time in a collective way, Canadian national level athletes.

31At the end of Sport Forum III, this is what was accomplished:

  • a new organization temporarily called the Coalition was formed to be the collective voice for sport in Canada and composed of all organizations at the national level of sport plus organizations of provincial sport groups which will meet yearly;

    • 27 On the issue of equity, organizations representing Aboriginal Canadians had been particularly vocal (...)

    each member group can send four representatives to the annual assembly.27 There must be gender balance in the delegation (50% female and 50% male) and one of the four representatives must be an athlete. First Nations people are invited to send one delegate from each of the provinces and territories in addition to four representatives of member groups; and

    • 28 Personal notes, Sport Forum III, October, 1992.

    a smaller management group will be composed of four executive and five members at large. Gender balance requirements must be met (no more than 60% on any one sex) for the management group and for any committees or delegations the management group organizes.28

32For the first time in the history of Canadian sport, gender equity is built into a structure endorsed by all its members. Participants then settled on a phase-in period to enable organizations to meet equity requirements gradually. All felt that something enormously important had been achieved: a commitment by the sport community to create a different and more equitable sport system.

  • 29 Ibid.

33After Sport Forum III, CAAWS decided not to do a news release because some members thought it would be “flaunting success.” It was not the success of CAAWS that would have been flaunted, but the success of the sport community’s “moving into the 20th century, and not a moment too late.”29 It was Sport Canada Women’s Program who released the notice to the public. Could it be that it is difficult for women to advertize or announce their successes?

  • 30 Personal notes from the FPTSPSC. Equity is defined as the principle and practice of allocation of r (...)

34In December, Tom MacIllfactrick and the author, the co-chairs of the original writing group from the Sport Forums, were invited to the Federal, Provincial, Territorial Strategic Planning Sport Committee (FPTSPSC). The task was to work with the federal Assistant Deputy Minister of Sport and his provincial counterparts to bring the provinces and territories in line with a coordinated sport planning structure for the future. Equity, and, in particular, gender equity30 was a major part of that work:

  • Under the equity and access banner are many marginalized groups seeking redress from inequitable situations in sport. A group may be considered marginalized if they have low participation rates, status, and/or visibility within the sport system. Groups traditionally disadvantaged in the public arena include women and minority groups such as those from racial or ethnic minorities, Aboriginal peoples, and people living with disabilities. As these groups and individuals within them seek to participate more fully in sport, sport is changing for the better.

  • Women form the largest “marginalized” group in sport. Despite being the majority of Canadians (52% of the population), women are considered a minority in governance and policy formation, participation in the full range of opportunities, and the promotion of sport. In essence, women participate as a minority group in a sport system designed by men. As well, women’s achievement in sport is largely measured against standards set by men. Gender equity is the principle and practice of fair and equitable allocation of resources and opportunities to both females and males. Gender equity is synonymous with fairness, justice, equality, and reasonableness. To be equitable means to be fair and to appear to be fair.

  • Other minority groups within Canadian sport include visible minority and immigrant groups, ethnic groups, aboriginal persons, persons living with disability, and seniors. In a society where there are historically advantaged groups which receive continuous systemic reinforcement, equity programs are being developed to eliminate the barriers to full participation for disadvantaged groups.

    • 31 From my notes of the FPTSPSC document prepared on Equity and Access by myself and Sue Neill, Strate (...)

    The quality of participation for some may be limited by language, economic disadvantage, or regional location. To achieve equity and access, all barriers to full participation must be addressed.31

Conclusion

35Women have made significant steps forward inside the institution of sport. Change has resulted from the culmination of some 20 years of efforts made by a variety of people, mostly women, with both liberal and radical strategies for change, working together almost companionably side by side. Changes to the sport system and the ramifications of those changes for sport organizations would not have occurred unless significant energy had already gone into the development of a general awareness of gender as an issue.

  • 32 Marilyn Frye. 1983. The Politics of Reality. Trumansburg, New York: The Crossing Press.

36For women in sport, the oppressive social structures are sometimes difficult to see. As Marilyn Frye has noted, when one is in a cage, it is difficult to realize that each wire of the cage is a form of oppression and that it is only by stepping back to contemplate the entire structure that we can see the interconnections and mutually reinforcing practices which make us feel trapped.32 It is through education and seeking to understand our own experience and the experiences of others that the oppression becomes visible, and we can see that sport does not have to remain an “intractable structure” based on discriminations of race, class, sex, ability, and age.

37CAAWS has maintained a two-pronged approach to facilitating change, education, and advocacy. It was gratifying to see that many who came to the microphones for Sport Forum II and III were members of or had volunteered with CAAWS in the past. Further, the women who went on the IPDP tour had an overall view of the nature of oppression. They were able to speak clearly and strongly about their view of a gender equitable sport system. Since the formation of the CSC, CAAWS has emerged as an international leader on issues such as sexual harassment, body image, and disordered eating in sport.

38The Women’s Program, Sport Canada, continues to develop policies and programs for more equitable sport. Sport organizations know they cannot survive as gender inequitable organizations, and Sport Canada has shown leadership in assisting them to change.

39The coalition building, both among women and between women and men, was key to bringing about change. Gender equity agreements would not have been passed by the Sport Forums without courageous presentations made by, for example, persons with disabilities, athletes’ rights representatives, and Aboriginal Canadians, who fully supported equity in all its forms and resisted attempts by the assembled body to divide the groups (e.g., gender equity against all other equity issues).

40Finally, there remains the question of success. In “feminizing” the sport institutions in Canada, a number of issues have arisen which qualify “success.” First, there is the issue of liberalism. As CAAWS helped sport people to become more aware and conscious of sexism in themselves and in their organizations, it was increasingly seen as a multi-service organization to help the sport community to become more gender equitable rather than as a “radical advocacy group.” CAAWS moved from a radical to a liberal stand. How then will CAAWS protect itself from co-optation?

  • 33 Constantina Safilios-Rothschild. 1974. Women and Social Policy. Prentice-Hall.

41Second, in moving the sport community beyond tokenism (e.g., for gender and for athlete representation), CAAWS and other advocates made themselves vulnerable to a backlash from those who are in positions of authority with strong resistance to change. Safilios-Rothschild (1974) identified such shifts in policy without shifts in leadership as a lethal combination for resisting change.33 Favourable public opinion about the changes taking place in sport and increased access by currently marginalized groups are key to maintaining positive momentum.

42Third, while commitments have been made within the formal political process, the politics of private interaction have not been addressed. The changes that have been brought about are through policy and organizational change in relation to policy. How then are individual interactions between women and men and between gender equitable and non-gender equitable organizations going to take place? Signs are that, although behaviours may be changing, resistance to gender equity that exists on an attitudinal level alters more slowly.

  • 34 Naomi Black. 1989. Social Feminism. Cornell University Press.

43Fourth, many of the women involved in these changes are not feminists; nor, as Naomi Black34 noted, “do they identify their efforts as likely to expand women’s autonomy.” By what means can all women be supported in their efforts to bring about change?

44Women in sport face many challenges in the future. This quotation from the late Audre Lorde points us clearly in the right direction:

  • 35 Audre Lorde. 1984. Sister Outsider. New York: The Crossing Press: 122.

We must root out internalized patterns of oppression within ourselves if we are to move beyond the most superficial aspects of social change.35

Notes

1 See, for example, the writings of Suzanne Laberge, Nancy Theberge, and Helen Lenskyj.

2 I have been working for more than thirteen years on issues concerning girls, women, and sport. For the first time, I feel something of great significance for equity and access has happened in this country and feminists made it happen! We have been successful in creating a major breakthrough for the participation of women in the sport community. In many ways, I never thought that this would be possible in my lifetime.

3 Bill C-131.1961. The Fitness and Amateur Sport Art.

4 Kirby, S.L. and A. LeRougetel, Games Analysis, Canadian Association for the Advancement of Women and Sport. 1, 2, May, 1993.

5 National Conference of Women and Sport, Government of Canada, Toronto, 1974.

6 The second national conference was The Female Athlete Conference co-sponsored by the Institute for Human Performance at Simon Fraser University and the federal government Popma, Anne (Ed.). 1980. The Female Athlete: Proceedings of a National Conference. Vancouver, BC: Simon Fraser University.

7 Personal notes from the founding meeting held in Hamilton, Ontario.

8 Canadian Sport and Fitness Administration Centre.

9 Lorraine Code. 1980. “Feminist Theory” in Burt, S., Code, L. and L. Dorney. Changing Patterns: Women in Canada. McClelland and Stewart: 15-50.

10 Titles include Games Analysis, On the Move Handbook Adolescent Women, Women in International Sport: Advancing Gender Equity Making and Informed Decision about Girls’ Participation on Boys’ Teams, Harassment in Sport-A Guide to Policies, Procedures and Resources, Toward Gender Equity for Women in Sport-A Handbook fir National Sport Organizations.

11 Sport Canada Policy on Women in Sport, Fitness and Amateur Sport, Minister of State, 1986: 6.

12 Ibid.

13 This was later altered when the new Liberal government created a ‘super ministry’ of Heritage and sport lost its minister and thus its direct access to the government.

14 Diane Palmason was Manager of the Women’s Program during the late 1980s and left the post in mid-1990.

15 For example, the Hall. A., Slack, T. and D. Cullen report on Women and Administration in sport was produced in 1990 as a direct result of Sport Canada funding.

16 Kirby, S.L. and A.J. LeRougetel. (1992). Games Analysis, CAAWS occasional papers, Ottawa.

17 Sport organizations at the national level include organizations such as Judo Canada and Basketball Canada (National Sport Organizations or NSOs). Also, multi-service organizations such as the Sport Information Retrieval Centre (SIRC) and the Sport Federation of Canada (SFC) and multi-sport organizations such as the Commonwealth Games Society and the Canadian Federation of Sport Organizations for the Disabled (CFSOD) are included. With some exceptions, the sport organizations are housed at the Canadian Federation Sport Administration Centre in Gloucester, outside Ottawa.

18 Lorraine Greaves. 1991. “Reorganizing the National Action Committee on the Status of 1986-1988,” in J. Wine and J. Ristock. Women and Social Change: Feminist Activism in Canada, James Lorimer and Co.: 101-116.

19 Sport Canada grew from 30 in 1970 to 121 in 1984 (Canada, DNHW, 1971-72, 1984-85) in Macintosh, D. (1988). “The Federal Government and Voluntary Sport Associations.” In J. Harvey and H. Cantelon. (1988). Not Just a Game: Essays in Canadian Sport Sociology, University of Ottawa Press: Ottawa: 121-140.

20 Judy Kent, Kent Consulting, Ottawa.

21 My particular task that weekend was to represent CAAWS and I volunteered to be on the team which drafted the Sport Forum mission statement, goals, and objectives.

22 S. Kirby, CAAWS Action Bulletin, November, 1991.

23 Government control of budgets (and hence organizations) was largely a question of the degree of dependence various sport organizations had on federal government financing. An organization such as Figure Skating Canada had considerable financial independence because of its ability to fundraise and its high media profile while Rowing Canada had considerable financial dependence because of the expense of organizing the sport and its limited ability to attract financial sponsors.

24 Success for Fitness and Amateur Sport Canada (the government) is still largely marked by the number of medals athletes won at the various multi-sport games (Commonwealth, Olympic, and Pan American Games specifically).

25 The International Professional Development Tour was co-sponsored by the Sport Canada — Women’s Program, The International Relations Program of Sport Canada, and the Canadian Sport and Fitness Administration Centre. The eleven women travelling, mostly at their own expense, were Phyllis Berck (Ont.), Jennifer Brenning (Ont.), Peggy Gallant (N.S.), Sandi Kirby (Man.), Danelle Laidlaw (B.C.), Marion Lay (Ont), Vicki Luke (Alta.), Marg McGregor (Ont), Rose Mercier (Ont), Toby Rabinovitz (Ont), and Sheila Robertson (Ont).

26 See the International Professional Development Report, The R. Tait MacKenzie Leadership Institute, Ottawa, 1992.

27 On the issue of equity, organizations representing Aboriginal Canadians had been particularly vocal. Since the organizational representation for Aboriginal Canadians was well developed, the Forum participants decided that an affirmative action step was necessary to enable Aboriginal Canadians to be “at future forums.” Vocal too were those representing those with disabilities. Since sport organizations for the disabled already existed, equity measures tor sport benefited these organizations. Disabled athletes also gained additional and very direct access to future forums through the “athlete representative” requirement

28 Personal notes, Sport Forum III, October, 1992.

29 Ibid.

30 Personal notes from the FPTSPSC. Equity is defined as the principle and practice of allocation of resources, programs and decision-making, fairly to all Access is defined as the principle and practice of providing opportunities to participate fully and of changing sport to accommodate the changing needs of all its participants.

31 From my notes of the FPTSPSC document prepared on Equity and Access by myself and Sue Neill, Strategic Planning, Sport Canada

32 Marilyn Frye. 1983. The Politics of Reality. Trumansburg, New York: The Crossing Press.

33 Constantina Safilios-Rothschild. 1974. Women and Social Policy. Prentice-Hall.

34 Naomi Black. 1989. Social Feminism. Cornell University Press.

35 Audre Lorde. 1984. Sister Outsider. New York: The Crossing Press: 122.

Auteur

Chair, Department of Sociology, University of Winnipeg

© Les Presses de l’Université d’Ottawa | University of Ottawa Press, 1999

Conditions d’utilisation : http://www.openedition.org/6540

Acheter

Volume papier

amazon.fr