Social inclusion and sport: culturally diverse women's perspectives

Australian Journal of Social Issues, Autumn, 2009 by Natasha Cortis

Introduction

Gender differences in patterns of sport and recreation participation are unsurprising. Women perform more domestic work and care throughout the lifecourse, and have less time and money for leisure than men (Bittman & Wajcman 2000). In Australia, smaller proportions of women than men participate in sport and recreation overall, and women choose activities they can time flexibly around household schedules, like walking or attending fitness classes rather than organised team sport (ABS 2006). More intriguing questions arise about how and why patterns of participation vary among women, according to age, the presence of children, health and financial status, ethnicity and culture; and which threads of experience different groups of women share. This article contributes new insights into one set of such questions, exploring how a significant group of Australian women, those from culturally diverse backgrounds, experience sport and recreation, the barriers they face, and how these can be overcome.

National statistics attest to pervasive inequalities in Australian women's sport. In terms of cultural diversity, women born outside the main English speaking countries (one in five women in Australia) are among the least likely to have participated in a sport or recreation activity in the last year (ABS 2006; ABS 2007). In 2002, the most recent year for which disaggregated birthplace data is available, less than half of women born in South and Central Asia, Southern and Eastern Europe, and North Africa and the Middle East participated in a sport or physical recreation activity, compared with over 60 percent of those born in Australia, North-West Europe (including the United Kingdom) and Oceania (including New Zealand). Women born in North Africa or the Middle East had the lowest rates of participation (19.5 percent); lower than both their male counterparts (42.7 percent) and women born elsewhere (ABS, 2006).

Cultural and gendered patterns of sport participation reflect underlying inequalities in access to community opportunities and infrastructure: inequalities which social policies and programs aim to eliminate. Yet so far, the social outcomes of sport have been only weak themes in either Australian sport or social policy. In contrast, overseas policy and research has progressed to straddle fields of sport promotion and social policy, treating sport as a space for, and subject of, targeted social action, and a way to alter broader patterns of inequality and marginalisation to overcome social disadvantage (Frey and Eitzon, 1991). In this frame, sport and recreation are considered sites for social inclusion, providing opportunities to construct self-identities and institutions; to extend social networks and strengthen social capital; to model and inculcate ethical behaviour; and to reduce isolation and antisocial behaviour and improve social cohesion (Collins & Kay 2003; Morris et al. 2003; Jackson et al. 2005).

For cultural minorities, sport can be seen to have 'levelling' potential, in building and retaining community networks (especially following the dislocation of migration); promoting, celebrating and affirming difference; dispelling stereotypes; and enhancing cultural pride and intercultural relations (Driscoll & Wood 1999; Hanlon & Coleman 2006; Taylor 2001). The logic is that values and behavioural norms modelled in multicultural sporting contexts will be transmitted into other areas of social life, and general feelings of belonging will improve as a result of being involved (Walseth & Fasting 2004). For culturally diverse women, sport and recreation activities are also celebrated for their potential to offer experiences of belonging, support and reciprocity, and sites of 'refuge' from traditional domestic roles and responsibilities, and restrictive family expectations (Walseth, 2006).

Although research and policy discourses are evolving to celebrate the inclusionary potential of sport, the converse dynamic is also possible: sport and recreation risk perpetuating inequalities, if activities reinforce segregation, or are blind to (and suppress) difference. Premising participation on conformity to dominant cultural norms can, for example, impede the expression of diversity and individual identity formation, and exclude groups from community infrastructure and opportunities, with implications for minority access to social, cultural and economic resources and physical health and wellbeing (Taylor 2004; Coalter 2007).

Inclusion and diversity in Australian sport policy

Over the last few decades, elite performance has been paramount in Australian sport policy, overshadowing issues of participation, equity and access (Green and Houlihan, 2005). Responding to Australia's poor performance at the 1976 Olympics, federal governments bolstered support for elite sport in the 1980s, establishing the Australian Sports Commission, the Australian Institute of Sport, and a Federal sports portfolio. Throughout the 1990s, criticism of the focus on elite performance grew, and, fuelled by public health concerns about inactivity and obesity, resources were increasingly directed toward promoting mass participation in sport as a way to promote physical activity (Stewart et al, 2004; Sport 2000 Taskforce). Over the last decade, community level participation has been entwined with a public health agenda and promoted through large-scale federal programs, like the 'Active Australia' initiative and the Active After-school Communities program.