Protest on the Podium
The image of Colin Kaepernick taking a knee during the American national anthem has become an iconic representation of the fierce debate around activism in sport. Acts of protest by athletes have occurred long before Kaepernick, yet the topic seems more contentious than ever. While some assert that those with a platform should use it, many have called on these athletes to “stick to sports.”
The current prevalence of activism in athletics has been cause for concern for the International Olympic Committee (IOC) ahead of the 2020 Summer Games in Tokyo. However, their message is clear: political protest will not be welcome at the games. In an effort to crack down on Rule 50 of the Olympic Charter, which states: “No kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas,” the IOC Athletes’ Commission released a new set of guidelines for the rule in January.
In a non-exhaustive list, the IOC guidelines provide several examples of what would constitute a protest, including “displaying any political messaging, including signs or armbands,” and “gestures of a political nature, like a hand gesture or kneeling.” The document also suggests that athletes in breach of Rule 50 will be disciplined on a case-by-case basis.
The document states: “It is a fundamental principle that sport is neutral and must be separate from political, religious or any other type of interference. Specifically, the focus for the field of play and related ceremonies must be on celebrating athletes' performance, and showcasing sport and its values.”
Sport has an ability to bring people together – like the soldiers in World War I, who despite being enemies, ceased fire on Christmas Day in 1914 to play a match of football. If the story of the Christmas truce teaches us anything, it is that sport is a place to find common ground – a narrative that has been deeply embedded in the fabric of our society. For many, sport is an escape from reality, if only for a few hours.
But despite this notion that sport is fundamentally neutral – pure, even – football stadiums, basketball courts and soccer fields do not exist in a vacuum. A uniform does not exempt the athletes who wear it from the violence attached to their skin, gender, religion or sexuality.
Take Venus and Serena Williams, who were called the n-word by spectators at the 2001 BNP Paribas Open and who have faced relentless racism and sexism their entire careers.
Take Andrew Johnson, the high school wrestler who was forced to cut his dreadlocks by a referee moments before a match just last year.
Take Eugenie Bouchard being asked to “give us a twirl” by a male reporter during an on-court interview.
Take the 2015 study Out on the Fields, which suggests that homophobia is more prevalent in sport than it is in greater society.
Take Asmahan Mansour, the 11-year-old who was ejected from a Quebec soccer tournament in 2007 for “safety concerns” regarding her hijab; take the countless women and girls who continue to face disqualification for the same reason, despite Nike and other companies creating a hijab specifically for sport.
Take Don Cherry.
Take the pay disparity between men’s and women’s teams in sports like soccer and hockey.
The playing field is anything but equal.
Sport can be a place to find common ground, and the Olympics are a special example of that. Even those who typically do not follow regular season athletics are captivated and moved deeply by this coming together of people from around the world. The IOC document states:
“We believe that the example we set by competing with the world's best while living in harmony in the Olympic Village is a uniquely positive message to send to an increasingly divided world. This is why it is important, on both a personal and a global level, that we keep the venues, the Olympic Village and the podium neutral and free from any form of political, religious or ethnic demonstrations.”
While athletes will not be permitted to engage in acts of protest on Olympic grounds, the document makes the distinction that athletes may express their views throughout the Olympic games, during interviews and on digital platforms, presumably social media.
Maybe the most compelling thing about sport, then, is not that it is “pure” or “neutral,” but that excellence in athleticism and sportsmanship prevails in spite of the oppressive systems that construct its stadiums and arenas. Maybe the question is not whether protest has a place in sport, but whether, in this current political moment, it is selfish to use sport as an escape from reality, when so many, including the athletes on the field, cannot.
Maybe the divisive thing is not the raised fist or the bent knee, but a greater unwillingness to see it.