Description
If you haven’t already, please watch the short documentary I posted, and share your reactions to it. What was the experience of watching it like for you? How effective do you think this film is as a public service announcement (PSA) to raise awareness of the issues with policies (previous & current) governing the sex-testing of female athletes? Based on this week’s readings, do you think this short film is a good example of public pedagogy and what Culp (2016) refers to as an “engagement of consequence”? Feel free to add any other reflections/comments you have related to this topic.
Original Posts: 350 word minimum
Replies (to at least one classmate): ~150 words
Here’s the post of a classmate that you will reply to and respond to.
As a woman, after watching this video, I immediately wanted to put on another set of clothing. While women need to go to the gynecologist to be examined for cancer, I even feel uncomfortable in that seat (TMI), but I can only imagine what this person was feeling while being examined on their sex. This had also made me feel abhorrent and uncomfortable because it highlights the transmisogyny and sexism that is still prevalent in sports. The consistent “are you sure you’re a woman?” was also difficult to hear because you become undoubtful of your gender. This felt as if it was a form of systemic sexual harassment because if you do not comply with the standards that are presented then you will not be permitted to compete as shown in the video. The International Athletic Association protocols for gender verification should be redeveloped without being as invasive. This video was an effective tool to illustrate the graphic issue of sex testing for female athletes. This is because of its visual effectiveness and usage of ethos and pathos. It draws in the reality of the individual and their experiences by showing and not telling. Ultimately it raises awareness of the ongoing issue while tugging on the audience to both ethical and pathological responses. I believe this short film is a great example of public pedagogy because it incorporates sources and analytics as opposed to a random video like TikTok that just states solely facts. This video is reliable and scholarly and consents for discussion.
According to Culp (2016), kinesiologists must be mindful of strategically combating issues within the community. Sex testing represents the hurdle, barriers in society are a lack of education in physical justice. Officials do not consider social diversity when deciding who can compete or not depending on the circumstances. As Kinesiology students it is eye-opening to see the bad and implore for change in social justice. Additionally, hormones should not depict whether they are male or female. In conclusion, the only way change can be implied to a complex issue like this is to have effective tools like such to bring awareness and education to evoke conversation amongst future individuals.
