Power and Truths in Combat Sports the Impact of Societal and Policy Changes on Governing Practices in Sport

Power and Truths in Combat Sports The impact of societal and policy changes on governing practices in sport.

Marianne Dortants

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 1 Power and Truths in Combat Sports The impact of societal and policy changes on governing practices in sport.

Macht en Waarheden in Vechtsporten

De invloed van sociaal-politieke verandering op sturingspraktijken in de sport. (met een samenvatting in het Nederlands)

Proefschrift

ISBN 978-94-028-0887-2

ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor Cover aan de Universiteit Utrecht Schilderij van Rob van den Boom op gezag van de rector magnificus, prof. dr. G.J. van der Zwaan, ingevolge het besluit van het college voor promoties Design/Lay-out in het openbaar te verdedigen op woensdag 17 januari 2018 Wendy Bour-van Telgen, Ipskamp Printing Enschede des ochtends te 10.30 uur Print Ipskamp Printing, Enschede

De digitale versie van het proefschrift is te vinden op: https://goo.gl/YMwTpC. door

Maria, Francisca, Theresia Dortants © Marianne Dortants, 2017 geboren op 1 augustus 1959 All rights are reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, distributed, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, without prior written permission of the author. te Brunssum

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 2 Power and Truths in Combat Sports The impact of societal and policy changes on governing practices in sport.

Macht en Waarheden in Vechtsporten

De invloed van sociaal-politieke verandering op sturingspraktijken in de sport. (met een samenvatting in het Nederlands)

Proefschrift

ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Universiteit Utrecht op gezag van de rector magnificus, prof. dr. G.J. van der Zwaan, ingevolge het besluit van het college voor promoties in het openbaar te verdedigen op woensdag 17 januari 2018 des ochtends te 10.30 uur

door

Maria, Francisca, Theresia Dortants geboren op 1 augustus 1959 te Brunssum

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 3 Promotoren: Prof. dr. M. van Bottenburg Prof. dr. A.E. Knoppers

Dit proefschrift werd (mede) mogelijk gemaakt met financiële steun vanuit het programma ‘Sport: Passie, Praktijk en Profijt’ 2007–2010, gefinancierd door het Ministerie van Volksgezondheid, Welzijn en Sport.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 4 Assessment Committee: Prof. dr. J. G. van Erp, Utrecht University, Utrecht University School of Governance Dr. N. van Amsterdam, Utrecht University, Utrecht University School of Governance Prof. dr. P. Zanoni, Hassselt University, Faculty of Business Economics Prof. dr. M. Theeboom, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Faculty Physical Education and Physiotherapy Prof. dr. R.F.J. Spaaij, Victoria University, College of Sport and Exercise Science

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 5 Contents

Chapter 1 Introduction to research in Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat 11 Sports ….. the world of Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports… 12 A first glimpse on the governing of FCMACS 13 Changes in the context of sport organizations 15 Changes in the context of FCMACS in the Netherlands 17 Exploration of a Foucauldian power-sensitive analytical framework for 19 the governing of sport Research questions 21 Discipline and Governmentality: exploring the multiplicity of thinking 21 and the governing of sport. Methodology 26 Reflections on the position as researcher as outsider 27 Outline of this dissertation 30 Chapter 2 Regulation of diversity through discipline: Practices of inclusion and 35 exclusion in boxing Abstract 36 Keywords 36 Introduction 36 Box Club Gym 37 Methodology 40 Dominant norms and values 41 The meaning of discipline at the BCG 42 Discipline and the body as the point of application 44 Ambiguous meanings of gender and ethnicity 47 Negotiation about who belongs in this gym 49 Conclusion 50 References 52 Chapter 3 The organization of diversity in a boxing club: governmentality and 57 entangled rationalities Abstract 58 Keywords 58 Introduction 58 Governmentality and the negotiation of sameness and differences 59 Boxing and the social organization of the regulation of violence 62 BCG in context 63 Methodology 64 Two different rationalities inform the governing of difference in BCG 66 Micro politics: dealing with ambiguous and conflicting rationalities 72 Discussion and conclusions 75 References 78

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 6 Chapter 4 Challenges in regulating full contact martial arts and combat sports 83 Abstract 84 Keywords 84 Introduction: the impasse 84 Mapping the field: stakeholders in regulation of FCMACS in the 87 Netherlands Governmentality in sports 88 Research In FCMACS 89 Methodology 90 Three regimes of practices 92 Discussion: why the impasse is maintained 106 References 110 Chapter 5 Regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and COMBAT SPORTS: How 115 Governmentality as an Analytical Framework informs practices of the Governing of Sports Abstract 116 Keywords 116 Introduction 117 Governmentality defined as an Analytical Framework to analyse 119 the Governing of Sport The History of the Present: Self-regulation of the FCMACS in the 122 Netherlands Methodology 124 Consent and Contradictions in Reasoning in search for new Truths 125 about FCMACS Discussion And Conclusion 135 References 138 Chapter 6 Discussion: Changing mixtures of regimes of practices transforming 143 sport (self) regulation Introduction 144 Results of the two case studies 146 General findings 150 Critical reflection on both studies 154 Concluding remarks 156 References chapter 1 and 6 157 Samenvatting (Summary in Dutch) 164 Dankwoord (Acknowledgements in Dutch) 169 Curriculum Vitae 172 Appendix 1 Co-auteursverklaring Hoofdstuk 2 178 Appendix 2 Co-auteursverklaring Hoofdstuk 3 180 Appendix 3 Co-auteursverklaring Hoofdstuk 4 182

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 7 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 8 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 9 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 10 1 Introduction to research in Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 11 Chapter 1

Various ‘truths’, such as that all children should go to school, that men and women need to have the same opportunities or that competition in sport needs to be fair, define what is considered obvious or common sense in daily practices. These ‘truths’, often unseen, guide people throughout their lives and may also be a powerful way to govern oneself and others by using preferred technologies of power, including those used in sport. These ‘truths’ seem to be clear and constant while simultaneously assumed to be negotiable. A strategic power play to reconstruct ’truths’ begins when circumstances and interests change. The main focus of this dissertation is on mechanisms that are and can be used to change ‘truths’ and how these changes are normalized so that ‘new truths’ become obvious, and common sense again in the governing of sport. A Foucauldian analytical framework is applied in the exploration of two cases in Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports (FCMACS) to advance the study of the complex mechanism of changes in truth in the governing of sport.

….. the world of Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports…

When I first entered into the world of FCMACS in 2005 I was intrigued when (kick) boxers explained to me that colour, religion and ethnicity were irrelevant in their gym; rather, diversity was determined by the trainer’s and fighter’s own initiative. Nor was there any government legislation or public policy directive that required gyms to be inclusive of gender, race or colour; diversity was an understood norm for gym management and practice. Driven by curiosity, I began my first case study of this dissertation in 2008 in an attempt to understand the practices of the governing of inclusion in FCMACS. The gym I studied allowed male and female boxers to become full participants, something that was not common practice at the time. My curiosity was also fuelled by the idea that possibly other organizations could learn something about governing diversity and inclusion of new participants from the involvement of this unexpected quarter.

Thinking and researching about FCMACS governance at the national level in 2012 took me well beyond the borders of a boxing gym and deep into the FCMACS world. Although the practices of kickboxing, Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) and Muay Thai seem to be comparable with practices in boxing gyms, these sports are organized in a completely different way at the national level. Kickboxing, MMA and Muay Thai are highly commercialised sports in the Netherlands, using many different styles and rules and regulated by various, often conflicting federations, while boxing is strictly regulated by one single national federation.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 12 Introduction to research in Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

My second case study introduced me to FCMACS with fewer regulated practices of governing than most sports. Here the human aspect of the sector - the practitioners, coaches, promoters, the variety of style and technique used and the pure passion 1 for FCMACS became my focus. The frustration caused by the discussions on the legitimacy of these sports and the struggle of practitioners, trainers, promoters, civil servants and mayors to regulate these sports more in line with conventional sports was also a recurring theme. The effort to satisfy this frustration and regulate these sports took the spotlight in my second case study.

So, have you ever been in a gym, visited a dojo, or like scientist Loic Waquant (2004), been in the ring, or perhaps in an octagon such as is used in MMA? Are you a regular visitor of large fight events?

Most researchers will probably reply negatively to these questions as I would have also done ten years ago. Based on the limited number of publications that deal with FCMACS, especially on the issue of the governing of these sports, it seems that research into FCMACS is not a concern of the academic world. FCMACS appears to function in the shadow of our society and based on the limited literature available, also in the shadow of the academic world. In this dissertation, I will familiarize the (scholarly) reader with the FCMACS milieu in the Netherlands, highlighting some of the specific characteristics and governing issues challenging it due to societal and political changes.

A first glimpse on the governing of FCMACS

This study is about challenges involved in governing of a specific group of sports namely boxing, kickboxing, Muay Thai and Mixed Martial Arts (MMA), all combat sports that claim discipline as an integral part of their culture and daily practice in the gym. These sports can also all be considered as competitive FCMACS with rule- limited systems to facilitate bouts and make comparison between fighters possible. Competitions are conducted in open settings with specifically defined rules and an athlete can lose by disqualification if he or she breaks the stated rules (Martínková & Parry, 2016). It is the adherence to the rules that allows these combat activities to be defined as a legitimate sport and distinguishes them from unregulated free fight styles where everything seems to be allowed. The ultimate aim of a FCMACS fighter in a competition is to knock down the opponent, force the opponent into submitting, scoring points and to then to be appointed by the jury as the winner of the contest. Boxing, kickboxing and Muay Thai each have their own specific styles

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 13 Chapter 1

and set of rules, while the hybrid style of MMA uses a mix of techniques and rules from various martial arts traditions and styles (see Bottenburg & Heilbron, 2006; Spencer, 2012; Martínková & Parry, 2016).

Although exact numbers are missing for various reasons, kickboxing is considered as the most practiced and popular FCMACS in the Netherlands. It developed rapidly in the 1970s and 1980s, due to the successes of Dutch fighters in the K11. Since the 1990s the mixing of different combat techniques became more common (Sánchez García & Malcolm, 2010). The more controversial FCMACS style, MMA has fewer participants in the Netherlands, but seems to be increasing in popularity due to the promotion by the Ultimate Fight Championship (UFC), a large commercial organization. The UFC, launched in 1993, exploited a new type of fight contest with few rules and as the ultimate test of a fighter’s strength. It was also called free fight, ultimate fight, cage fight or No Holds Barred (NHB) (Bottenburg & Heilbron, 2006), provoked public debate and protests and resulted in a ban of these kinds of fights in several states and countries. Since the ban, the UFC worked together with states in the USA and countries to make these extreme fights more acceptable (Berg & Chalip, 2013; Bottenburg & Heilbron, 2006) introducing rules like the introduction of weight classifications, changing the name to MMA, ensuring that referees intervene more quickly in fights and giving less camera attention to wounded fighters than had been the practice (Bottenburg & Heilbron, 2006). By introducing these regulations and by the sanctioning of these rules by referees, MMA developed a more traditional culture of sport, although discussions concerning the admissibility of these sports continued. None the less, this development opened possibilities for the further development of MMA across USA and Europe (Berg & Chalip, 2013). Currently FCMACS are considered as a specific classification of sports, that are self-regulated by specific rules that are formulated, controlled and sanctioned by autonomous federations, often in cooperation with commercial organizations.

There is a vast difference between boxing and other FCMACS, like kickboxing, Muay Thai and MMA due to the strict regulation of boxing by the national boxing federation with regard to the safety of practitioners. Boxing is an Olympic sport, fits into the conventional sport structure and is governed in the Netherlands by one national federation that organizes competitions, education of coaches, referees and juries. Only licensed coaches, referees and juries are allowed to lead a gym, practice sessions and matches. There is a strict follow-up system for practitioners facilitated by using items such as one national fighter’s passport for boxers. On the

1 K-1 is a Japanese martial arts organization that combines techniques of Thai boxing, taekwondo, karate, kung fu, kickboxing and traditional boxing. Each year a world K-1 tournament is held to determine which eight fighters may participate in K-1 World Grand Prix in Japan

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 14 Introduction to research in Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

other hand Kickboxing, Muay Thai and MMA are non-Olympic sports and as such are regulated by a plurality of federations, each with its own set of rules and various registered fighter passports. Although federations and commercial promoters like 1 UFC use sets of standardized rules, these styles of FCMACS developed differently and somewhat separate from regular recognized sports, a process that is called para-sportification (Bottenburg & Heilbron, 2006).

These two different ‘worlds’ of FCMACS, strictly regulated boxing and the less regulated FCMACS, function largely separate from each other, although fighters seem to change from one style to another and back. Their relationship can be described as rivalry more than cooperative. Boxers and their trainers favour their own sport because they are Olympians which gives them more status. However, boxing is considered by the practitioners of kickboxing, Muay Thai and MMA as too rule-bound. According to them, boxing contests are ‘boring’ and lack excitement, which is why boxing has become less popular in the Netherlands. On the other hand, kickboxing, Muay Thai and MMA are described by the ‘boxing world’ as unregulated and unsafe sports where too much money, and possibly criminality is involved (Dortants & Knoppers, 2016). There seem to be different views or ‘truths’ about the nature of FCMACS what it should be.

Changes in the context of sport organizations

Sports take place in dynamic social political contexts and consequently the practices or routines of the governing of sports will need to be adapted to new and emerging public climates. For example recently sport organizations are challenged by governments and politicians on social political issues like integrity and safety or their contribution to participation and antidiscrimination in and through sport (Nagel, Schlesinger, Baylec, & Giauqued, 2015). As organizations respond to these developments, other stakeholders become involved in the governing of sports such as when national governments, who intend to implement their policy goals to improve health, reduce crime or boost national prestige through sport, become partners in the governing of sport (Green & Houlihan, 2006). More involvement occurs when the national or federal governments or the EU council intervene to secure safety of practitioners, or when moral and ethical issues are raised as in discussions of permissibility of MMA. Or more in general, stakeholders such as police intervene to prevent the use of doping, match fixing and involvement of criminal organizations while commercial organizations interfere to provide additional funding to fulfil the ambitions of elite sport. Finally, also due to changes in the

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 15 Chapter 1

context of sport organizations, the population of sport organizations becomes more diverse (Nagel et al., 2015) regarding gender (such as in the boxing gym), ethnicity and/or social class.

The organization of sport becomes more complex since various pratitioners and stakeholders have become involved and therefore various ways of reasoning and practices of governing interfere in the routines of the governing of sport. It blurres the lines between sectors (Misener & Misener, 2017), provokes discussions and often confusing debates about what the specific nature of that sport is and what values should be guiding in the governing of these sports. It seems that what sport organizations are expected to be, their essence or nature, and how they are supposed to be governed may be challenged when sport organizations react to future changes in the social and political context.

In addition to the various ways of reasoning that have become intertwined in discussions about the governing of sport, sport organizations also face an increase in modes of governing, such as described by Green and Houlihan (2006), Van Kleef (2014) and Nagel et al. (2015). Such an increase means that different procedures and regulatory routines intertwine in the governing of sport which makes the regulation of sports a more complicated task and challenges self-regulation. Stakeholders with various backgrounds, different perceptions, objectives, interests and practices of governing have become members or partners in the governing of sports, for example, sport organizations have to be accountable to government organizations in a specific way that differs from being accountable to traditional stakeholders like individual members of a club (Green & Houlihan, 2006). Geeraert and Bruyninckx (2014) and Fahlén, Eliasson, and Wickman (2008) argue that sport organizations have lost the freedom of self-regulation since those other than sport organizations have become involved in the governing of sport. Here research has focused mainly on the loss of autonomy of sport organizations incurred through involvement of governmental or commercial organisations (Green & Houlihan, 2006; Phillpots, Grix, & Quarmby, 2010).

Particular responses to socio-political changes question taken for granted ‘truths’ about the nature of a sport and historically-culturally routinizes of governing it. In addition, dealing with private or public organizations affects the self-regulation of sport organizations that are accustomed to a certain degree of autonomy in the organization of their sport (Green & Houlihan, 2006). Until recently it seems that the sport sector and public organizations have functioned in separate worlds, each with its own procedures and systems of regulation due to a perceived autonomy (Bruyninckx, 2012). However sport organizations cannot be considered completely

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 16 Introduction to research in Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

autonomous in self-regulation since they are part of a specific society with norms of what is considered as ‘normal’ sport. Self-regulation is therefore also bounded to specific societal standards or normative boundaries in which they regulate 1 themselves. FCMACS are confronted frequently with these societal standards in discussions about the existence and self-regulation of these sports and it makes the governing of these sports often more controversial than conventional sports.

Changes in the context of FCMACS in the Netherlands

FCMACS are also confronted with changes in social political standards and requests from other stakeholders. Although all sport organizations are questioned frequently, it seems that the current questioning of the governing of FCMACS is more challenging. For example, when FCMACS are asked, as are other sports, to respond to issues of integrity, safety and their contribution to the integration and disciplining of youths, these challenges are often accompanied by additional questions about the legitimacy of these sports (Spencer, 2012). The questioning of these issues is not common in sports like football, tennis or hockey. It appears that the overt use of violence in the ring or octagon, where the ultimate goal is to knockdown the opponent as quickly as possible, raises sentiments of disgust and disapproval. These sentiments are also the case in boxing, but less so than in comparison with the other FCMACS suggesting that kickboxing, Muay Thai and MMA are less conventional than strictly regulated boxing. Although training regiments and fight events ought to be well structured as fair and safe fights, the practices of FCMACS continue to provoke societal and political discussions on whether these sports must be part of our current “civilized” society. The double standard affecting FCMACS make these sports particularly vulnerable to social and political changes and places a great deal of pressure on the self-regulating capacities of these sports to meet all requirements. Therefore socio-political changes appear to have a greater impact on the governing of FCMACS because various normative arguments become entangled in discussions about the governing of these sports. This situation makes FCMACS even more complex to govern in comparison with less controversial sports.

This dissertation deals with two challenges arising out of the new expectations and changing social and political circumstances that affect the governing of FCMACS. The first challenge finds its expression in the boxing gym where trainers and boxers manage diversity and are expected to adjust their governing to a new ‘truth’ about who and what boxers are and ought to be; simply, the context of

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 17 Chapter 1

boxing has changed since women are allowed to compete at the Olympic Games (Woodward, 2014). Although women were not always absent from gyms (Gems & Pfister, 2014), research reveals that the full participation of women was unusual or inconsequential (Woodward, 2004; Mennesson, 2000). In this case study, where women were accepted as important and full participants, the question is “how do self-regulating practices normalize female boxers as ‘true’ boxers”? I focus my discussion on how historically-culturally ways of reasoning come to be adapted and how a new truth directs the use of technologies of power in the governing of full participation of women in the gym. This discussion provides insight into the self- regulatory mechanism of diversity without legislation being imposed. The results of this case study may also give insights into current and future governing of inclusion in sport organizations as more sports become accessible for diverse groups of participants (Nagel et al, 2015).

The second case study is situated at the national level and investigates the self- regulation of a group of Dutch FCMACS, namely kickboxing, MMA and Muay Thai. Two social-political developments have been major tests for the self-regulation of these sports. First, FCMACS organizations were expected to implement the “resocialization of youths at risk” Dutch government policy goals through FCMACS disciplinary teaching methods. Organized sport and government bureaucracy became intertwined and stakeholders from FCMACS and the government questioned the existing routines of self-regulation. The second development disturbing the autonomous self-regulation of FCMACS was the abrupt ban of large fight events in Amsterdam in 2010, followed by bans in other cities. Thus the local governments interfered through local legislation in regulating these sports. These two developments provoked a discussion about the lack of self-regulation of these sports at the national level. In this context, the second case study started a search for compelling governmental assistance to require self-regulation of FCMACS in order to be able to comply with current safety and pedagogical requirements in sports.

The search for what is called the regulation of self-regulation of FCMACS is at the core of the second case study and its results served as input for the revision of the regulation of Dutch FCMACS. Although the findings from both case studies are specific to the Netherlands and to FCMACS, I suggest that the analytical approach and the findings of both case studies can also inform the governing of FCMACS in other countries and the governing of other sports.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 18 Introduction to research in Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

Exploration of a Foucauldian power-sensitive analytical framework for the governing of sport 1 A number of studies (e.g. Shilbury, O’Boyle, & Ferkins, 2016; Gammelsæter, 2010; Misener & Misener, 2017) acknowledge the increased plurality and complexity of the governing of sport including shifts in truths and in the power balance between sport organizations and other stakeholders. However, the analysis of their data suggests that these shifts are more or less unintended consequences of the involvement of other stakeholders in the governing of sport. This is what I call a bipolar analysis focusing on the shift of regulatory power from sport organizations to governmental organizations. In a bipolar analysis, sport organizations seem to ‘lose’ power and are easily regarded as a ‘victim’ of, for example, the government or a commercial organization that seems to become the predominant force in the governing of their sport. It seems that there is little attention given to the agency or the counter power of sport organizations in these shifts in the governing of sport. Similarly research on organizational diversity seems to focus primarily on structural organizational inequalities that hinder full participation of new groups of members. It seems that scholars in their analysis pay less attention to the proceeds of negotiations and dynamic power plays and thus to the ‘agency’ of various members of organizations in adjustments of ‘truths’ and the governing of sport.

Most scholars therefore seem to use, although often implicitly, what I call a more traditional conceptualization of power. Here power is viewed as owned by a specific group, organization or institution and thus, those who have the resources of power are able to maintain dominant social structures. This bipolar conceptualization of power creates a hierarchy of those who have power over those who have little or no power and where power (structures) only work(s) oppressively, without tending to the interplay of power. Research from this more traditional conceptualization of power provides significant insights, but might be too limited to understand the complexity of the current governing of sport because it assumes that those with specific roles or status will automatically ‘have’ power over others or, that power structures are irreversible. It might not grasp the complexity because it locates power in individuals, institutions or social structures and considers it less as situated ‘power plays’.

For the study of changes in the governing of sport I want to use a process approach of power that seems to be more congruent with a perception of power in terms of complexity and dynamics (Buchanan & Badham, 2000). Here power is conceptualized as ‘circuits of power’ where power flows through different

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 19 Chapter 1

modalities (Clegg, Courpasson, & Phillips, 2006, p. 241). In both case studies I use a Foucauldian conceptualization of power that refers to power relations and to situational dynamics of conduct and counter conducts. In this framework power is multi-centred, dynamic and irreversible, and not situated at one place or institution. It is viewed as relational where stakeholders are involved in a continual strategic power game trying to promote their ‘truth’ and to conduct themselves and others towards securing preferred outcomes.

In addition to a reduced focus on a dynamic conceptualisation of power, most scholars (see Gammelsæter, 2010) pay little attention to the relation between technologies of power and the truths that direct the use of these technologies of power. Governmentality as analytical framework for this dissertation can also pay attention to the analysis of the relationship between specific historically-culturally procedures of governing, or what Foucault calls technologies of power, and the ‘truths’ or rationalities that direct the use of these technologies of power. More attention to the complexity of shifts in truths and technologies of power in the ongoing strategic power play in the governing of sports might be informative to understanding the present and future forms of governing of sport. This approach might also give voice to a larger variety of truths and show alternative directions for the governing of sports. In both case studies, I used Foucault’s work and that of scholars who also used his work as an analytical framework to facilitate disentangling the interplay of the multiplicity of truths and related technologies of power that are currently relevant in the strategic power play of the governing of sport. This knowledge might also be relevant to the present debate on the governing of sport in general and specifically on discussions and recent research on the joint governing of sports (Misener & Misener, 2017; Svensson & Seifried, 2017).

This study of how changes in the social and political context affect negotiations about what kind of ‘truths’ or mix of ‘truths’ become leading in governing intends to explore an advanced analytical framework and aims to provide additional understandings of how shifts in the governing of sports are or could be realised. Expanded insights into the interplay of forces in the governing of sports can provide critical reflections on present and future forms of the governing sports; or as Dean (2010) explains: knowing how thinking and technologies of power work facilitates ‘doing things differently’ (p. 49).

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 20 Introduction to research in Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

Research questions

This is a study of how context affects change in the governing of FCMACS. 1

The overall question to be answered in this dissertation is: How are practices in the governing of sport/FCMACS adjusted to meet socio- political challenges and what can be learned from analysing these adjustments using a Foucauldian analytical framework?

In case study one: 1. How do self-regulating practices normalize female boxers as ‘true’ boxers in the gym? 2. How can the full participation of female boxers in the gym be understood from a Foucauldian analytical framework? 3. What can organizations learn from practices governing diversity in boxing?

In case study two: 4. What motivations affect decisions stakeholders make about adjustments to the governing of FCMACS and what might be important about these for the future governing of these sports? 5. How can the current impasse in the governing of FCMACS in the Netherlands be understood from a Foucauldian analytical framework and how does it inform the future governing of these sports? 6. What can others, such as policy makers and researchers/scholars in the Netherlands and elsewhere, learn from Dutch efforts to regulate FCMACS?

Discipline and Governmentality: exploring the multiplicity of thinking and the governing of sport.

Foucault’s work, in this study, is the basis for a power sensitive analytical framework used to analyse practices of governing. The emphasis in the first case study was on how preferred disciplinary technologies of power worked in the gym. The notion of ‘discipline’ is a frequently used term by practitioners of FCMACS and, with this term, boxers and trainers express that discipline is an important way of reasoning and governing of FCMACS. Theoretically, the early work of Foucault (1995) on discipline was used to understand how power and truths about boxing work at a specific place and time. According to Foucault (1995) disciplinary technologies work in a ‘protected place of disciplinary monotomy’ (p. 141). The use of disciplinary

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 21 Chapter 1

technologies of power is part of this analysis and considered as the exercise of authority over individuals and groups within a specific territory, like in a gym.

Furthermore what is considered as ‘the truth’ about boxing – what boxing is, what boxers are and ought to be, has become less stable and is apparently ‘under ongoing negotiation’. This calls for a more detailed and refined conceptual framework to understand the interrelationship between various technologies of power and the different ways of reasoning as forms of thought or knowledge about what can be considered as the ‘truth’ about boxing. Therefore the later work of Foucault on governmentality will be used as an analytical tool for a situated analysis of multiple practices of actual governing at the local level.

In the second case study the concept of governmentality will be further developed as an analytical framework to understand the current practices of (self) regulation of FCMACS. The concept of governmentality was first used by Foucault in the Collège de France lectures in 1978 and 1979. By using the concept of governmentality he elaborated and refined his work on the analysis of power in studying governing populations. Besides analysing the individual body and its disciplinary formation in 1978 in ’Discipline and Punish’, he started to focus on the double character of processes of governing as practices of disciplining and of self-disciplining. In this new theoretical orientation he added the dimension of the analysis of power relations from the viewpoint of ‘conduct of conducts’. That means that governing is a widespread, often invisible phenomenon, not only exercised by the national government. On the contrary, a study of conduct of conduct is about individuals and groups who seek to determine or influence own conduct and the conduct of others (Walters, 2012). That means that power is multi-centred, with a plurality of sites of governing and has no essential qualities. It can be considered as a ‘struggle to secure “truthfully” embedded meanings’ (Clegg, Courpasson, & Phillips, 2006, p. 10). This allowed Foucault to analyse the close relationship between techniques of power and forms of knowledge/’truths’/rationalities and the relationship between technologies of power and technologies of the self (Bröckling, Krasmann, & Lemke, 2011).

Foucault used the concept of governmentality in a number of ways and what he meant by this concept was not entirely clear and well defined. Foucault suggests connecting together modes of veridiction (a statement that is true according to the worldview of a particular subject), techniques of governmentalities (the procedures by which people’s conduct is governed), and practices of the self (Foucault, 2011, p.8). He was not able to develop his ideas on governmentality further because of his early death in 1984 but many other scholars did, first in the Anglophone world

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 22 Introduction to research in Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

and later in Germany, Scandinavia, Belgium, the Netherlands and France (see for an overview Bröckling, Krasmann, and Lemke, 2011, p. 8-10 and Miller and Rose, 2008, p.14). After his death a debate arose over what Foucault meant with the concept 1 of governmentality. Although there are various interpretations of the concept, in general two approaches can be distinguished, the first of which is a more specific interpretation reflecting the kinds of power relations characteristic of liberalism where the economy becomes the leading factor in the governing of populations. Governmentality studies using the historically specific version apply a liberalism framework in order to understand how liberal rationalities and technologies of power are decisive in today’s governing (Dean, 2010). Here governmentality can be considered as a particular regime of governing that takes an economic way of reasoning leading in how society should be governed. The second, more general approach of governmentality applies the concept of governmentality as an analytical framework or tool to analyse the exercise of power to shape the governing of one self and others, the so called ‘conduct of conducts’ (Dean, 2010; Walters, 2012). Governmentality studies that use the more general version elaborate the concept as a theoretical framework to analyse the multiplicity of rationalities or ‘truths’ and technologies in governing. In this dissertation I use the latter approach to develop a refined analytical framework to analyse the intricacies of contemporary governing of sports.

I will elaborate this theoretical framework by drawing on the work done by of Bröckling, Krasmann, and Lemke (2011), Dean (2010), Miller and Rose (2008) and Walters (2012) on governmentality. In their approach power is conceptualized as having a dispersed character and consists of a multiplicity of interrelated rationalities and technologies of power that are relevant in governing. Here the use of governmentality is conceptualized as ‘governing in plurality’, which means there is not one centre from which governing occurs, but several in an ongoing power play of multiple stakholders that try to govern towards securing preferred outcomes. There are attempts to conduct oneself and others and there are counter conducts, as an ongoing process of govering or, as Lemke (2002) explains, power as strategic games. In these strategic power games, which are considered as part of human interaction, the fields of actions of others are structured. This analysis of strategic games therefore goes beyond a bipolar and one way analysis of governing as is done in studies where only the interference of the state or commercial organizations in the governing of sport organisations is analyzed.

Dean (2010), Bröckling, Krasmann, and Lemke (2011) and Miller and Rose (2008) have worked out the concept of governmentality focusing on the technologies and rationalities of (self-) governing. They focus on the interrelationship of ways

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 23 Chapter 1

of reasoning and governing. Dean elaborates this connection between thought or rationality and governing as expressed in the hybrid term governmentality. By using the concept ‘regimes of practices’ the interrelationship of power and rationalities can be described as routine ways of doing things in certain places and certain times. The analysis of regimes of practices requires questioning what ‘truth’, knowledge or way of reasoning directs the use of specific technologies of power in governing. These interrelated technologies of power can be explored by analysing how techniques, instruments or mechanisms comprise authority in governing. The use of this analytical framework prioritizes ‘how’ questions and enables interrelated ways of reasoning and governing in strategic power plays (Dean, 2010, pp. 41-44). This analysis can facilitate the revelation of various constructions of problems and solutions that are situated in ‘particular ’.

Dean’s concept of regimes of practices provides a useful tool in analyzing how stakeholders construct preferred ways of governing FCMACS. The rationalities, as the specific way of thinking (reasoning) about what is considered as ‘the truth’ about sports like FCMACS, and their technologies (or techniques or mechanisms) as specific and preferred ways of acting, intervening and directing (Dean, 2010) are the dimensions on which I focus. In the first case study I explore how (a mix of) regimes operate, interfere and adapt due to changes in the environments. Thus I look at the conditions under which regimes emerge, continue to operate, and are transformed (Dean, 2010). I consider practices of governing to be situated strategic power games of multiple regimes of practices. The existence of multiple regimes makes, according to Dean, ‘borrowings’ across regimes possible. These ‘borrowings’ seem to facilitate the dealing with issues where adaptations to present ways of reasoning and governing appear to be important. The starting point of the analysis of governing is not a theoretical question but a situation where practices of governing are called into question and one that assumes that every situation has its own specific mix of regimes of practices. The analysis begins with the exploration of how people govern and are governed and also, in both case studies, where I start to analyse the routine ways of governing FCMACS in the gym and on the national level.

I apply the concept of governmentality to both the case of regulation of diversity in the boxing gym and to the case of regulation of FCMACS in the Netherlands. My analysis is in line with the general approach of governmentality in contributing to situated analyses and does not intend to develop general theories about governing sports. I use the concept of regimes of practices by Dean (2010) because it provides tools to analyse the relationship between rationalities and technologies of power of each regime of practice. However, by exploring the concept of governmentality

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 24 Introduction to research in Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

as an analytical tool I also make this framework more accessible in the field of the governing of sport. Governmentality as analytical framework shows how a set of regimes of practices come together and indicate possibilities for the production 1 of a regime of truth that probably can become leading in the governing of sport.

In using a Foucauldian analytical framework in a study of the normalization of the participation of women in boxing and a case study of challenges in the governing of FCMACS, I attempted to contribute to the knowledge about the governing of sport in general and discussions in the field of organizational diversity studies and FCMACS studies. In general the use of this analytical framework will facilitate the disentanglement of the multiplicity of truths and related technologies of power that are relevant in the strategic power play of the present day governing of sports. More insights into the interplay of forces in the governing of sports can provide critical reflections on current and future forms of the governing of sports. I will also explore how the concept of governmentality could be helpful in diversity studies and in facilitating research on the governing of FCMACS.

Diversity Sport organizations are increasingly confronted with a variety of societal changes such as the necessity of integrating new groups into mainstream society (Nagel et al., 2015). Critical diversity research has mainly focused on examining structural organizational inequalities. Zanoni, Janssens, Benschop, & Nkomo (2010) suggest adding an alternative path to this type of research by conceptualizing diversity as an ongoing dynamic practice. They argue that more focus should be on attempts to change gendered constructions. Relevant here is the understanding of how changes are governed. The concepts of discipline and regimes of practices offer an analytical framework to get a better understanding of the ongoing practices and strategic games as well as the complexity and ambiguity of managing diversity, especially where changes occur in the inclusion of a group that was previously excluded. Results may be context and FCMACS specific (Channon, 2013), but also reveal mechanisms of governing that could also facilitate inclusion of new groups of members in other organizations. This study can complement critical diversity studies that have focused on the mechanisms of exclusion.

I build on the diversity research of Ahonen et al. (2014) by further developing an analytical framework that uses work on governmentality by Bröckling, Krasmann, and Lemke (2011), Dean (2010), Miller and Rose (2008) and Walters (2012). This framework enables the investigation of historically-culturally specific relations of power and forms of knowledge or ‘truths’ to understand how diversity is or can be governed in an organization.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 25 Chapter 1

The governing of FCMACS Finally I intend to contribute to the field of research on the governing of FCMACS, sports that are often contested and seem to have difficulties in the governing of their activities due to their specific character. A few studies have focussed on the organization and regulation of these sports - (see Vertonghen, et al., 2014, Berg and Chalip, 2013, Brent & Kraska, 2013 and Collinet & Delalandre, 2013). In applying governmentality as analytical framework on the Dutch case of regulation of FCMACS, I intend to contribute further insight into the complexity of regulating FCMACS, also to inform future ways of governing FCMACS. These insights might contribute to actual debates about (changes in) the regulation of FCMACS.

Methodology

The current study can be considered as research in the broad field of interpretive studies that is inspired by what is called the post-structuralism of Foucault (Bevir & Rhodes, 2015). Research in this tradition focuses on constructions of meanings and on the framework of meanings where practices become real and understandable. These frameworks can be compared by what Dean (2010) calls ’regimes of practices’, a cluster of meanings that constructs the beliefs of individuals and makes specific practices possible. This kind of analysis asks researchers to position themselves between structure and agency. Governmentality implies analysis of dominance by social structures and of freedom (Walters, 2012). Therefore both studies involve the analysis of dominant structures or ‘regimes of practices’ and the analysis of forms of counter-conduct to resist these forms of structural domination. So there is always agency, but not in the sense of complete autonomy but always situated in particular contexts (Bevir & Rhodes, 2015) structured by existing ‘regimes of practices’. A situated analytics as suggested by Dean (2010) is congruent with this, Foucault inspired, interpretive approach.

Both case studies in this dissertation investigate practices of governing, the rationalities and technologies that are employed to shape conduct of FCMACS in the setting of the gym and on the national level. Based on the work by Dean (2010) and Miller and Rose (20008), I began both case studies with the issue of current ways of governing. I asked questions such as: how is it being governed? And why in this specific way? I started the mapping various ways of reasoning and specific related tactics, strategies and techniques of governing to ‘understanding the specificity of different tactics and strategies of power’ (Walters, 2012, p. 14). Dean (2010) and Walters (2012) both emphasize on critical use of governmentality

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 26 Introduction to research in Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

as analytical framework. According to Dean (2010), ‘taken for granted assumptions’ and categorizations must be interrogated constantly, especially when these self- evident ‘truths’ become prominent in practices. Walters warns for ‘applicationism’ 1 of the concept of governmentality as analytical toolbox where the concept simply is applied to particular empirical areas or topics. He stresses what he calls ‘critical encounters’ (unexpected meetings) and points towards the use of the concept of governmentality with focus on the facilitation of new ways to understand social issues.

I used a variety of qualitative methods to study practices of governing FCMACS on the local and national level. In the case study of the local gym thirty observations were conducted during practice sessions, boxing competitions and in informal settings before, during and after practice sessions from 2008-2010. In addition, six boxers, three trainers and a sport consultant were interviewed once, twice or three times. In the case study dealing with the regulation of FCMACS at the national level I conducted 43 interviews with a variety of stakeholders from the FCMACS sector (coaches, fighters, promoters, managers, a referee, directors of federations), with national and local civil servants, a mayor and alderman, a member of a local advisory commission on sport, police and a representative from the Dutch umbrella sport organization (NOC*NSF). I also analysed documents of governmental organizations, federations and (social) media (newspapers, websites, TV, Twitter and fora). I attended meetings and fight events to obtain further insight into the discussion on regulation of FCMACS (See further methodology in the following chapters).

Reflections on the position as researcher as outsider

The position of the researcher in FCMACS is discussed by researchers as Wacquant (1995; 2004; 2014), Woodward (2008), Spencer (2012) and Sánchez Garcia & Spencer (2014) who strongly recommend becoming an insider as researcher. The immersion of the researcher in this specific field of qualitative research is considered as an important strategy. However, Woodward also questions the ability of a researcher who is part of the field or research (insider) to reflect on distinctive embodiments of the researcher and the tension between objectivity and subjectivity. With this discussion in mind, and because I had no ambition to become a (kick)boxer, I choose to become a non-participant FCMACS researcher. This role was best for me and I became a regular visitor to the gym. As outsider, I never experienced the pain of the intensive training required for these specific sports (but did so in other sports), sparring sessions or the confrontations in the ring, cage or octagon. Perhaps

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 27 Chapter 1

that can be considered a disadvantage however, my outsider position gave me the opportunity to sit on the bench and observe, to chat with youth, parents and often with the senior trainer who delegated the training to his younger colleagues. The senior trainer liked to talk about his life, what he considered important, the lives and backgrounds of other trainers, the young boxers and boxing in general. Not being involved in training activities enabled me to hear many stories about boxing. I also became familiar with trainers and boxers who frequented the gym. It provided me with much ‘inside information’, but I didn’t experience what it was to be a female boxer. I don’t know exactly what I missed as a non-participant; I can only speculate on that and compare with the studies of e.g. Wacquant (2004), (2012), and (Rana, 2014) who were full participants.

To validate the interpretations of what I saw and heard, I presented the most important findings of my case study of the gym at the end of the training in 2010. I spoke with trainers and some boxers about a chapter in a (Dutch) book about their gym. Generally, people recognized the story I told about the practices and routines in their gym. I also saw that it provoked a discussion between trainers and female boxers about what it meant or could/should mean as women are coached as boxers. Should women be treated differently than men because they were women? Things did become uncomfortable when the findings revealed that trainers were most interested in and were defined as trainers only of successful women boxers. The complete findings of the gym case study are detailed in Chapter two and three.

The second case study was conducted at arm’s length from the daily routines of the gym. I consider the outsider position as an advantage when I explored FCMACS at the national level, a context that is full of conflicts and fragmentation. It is very difficult to be an insider and not be involved or categorized into a group of fighters/ managers/promoters. I think that being an outsider gave me the opportunity to speak freely about issues in governing these sports, including its conflicts. The many mutual accusations that were regularly expressed during the interviews took me by surprise. I also became aware that the interviewees had their own agenda, meaning that certain things told me during the interviews with a special attention and expectations were such things that I would or could not in good conscience believe or act upon. This forced me to reflect on the positioning of the interviewee in this field full of conflicting interests and tensions and to understand how their history, context and position may have shaped their way of reasoning and interests.

However, my position as outsider was also questioned. The day before our case study on regulation of FCMACS was presented at a national conference in January

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 28 Introduction to research in Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

2013, I saw a discussion at the forum Mixfight.nl. dealing with what was to be expected of our study. Someone posted the following comment: ‘Who is that middle aged woman who thinks that she can tell us something about our sports?’ 1 followed by all the information about me that could be found on the internet. The question was legitimate. I studied a group of sports that I have never practiced, and in which I had no prior interest. The question as to whether or not research from an outsider’s perspective is valid is also legitimate. Does a researcher need to engage in embodied sociology (Sánchez Garcia & Spencer, 2014) and undergo the process that is studied, like Wacquant did in his study in boxing and developed as a method of carnal sociology? (Wacquant, 2004). In this second case study I had worried about the plausibility of the representation I gave about the governing of FCMACS. The above mentioned questions at the forum on Mixfight.nl with regard to the case study on regulation FCMACS, heightened my concern. However, the day after the conference and presentation of research results, I saw parts of the report, quoted verbatim from the report on the same forum as where I had earlier found the critical questions. These quotations were accompanied with affirming comments, for example, “based on this case study, really something needs to happen in the governing of these sports.” I concluded that I probably had interpreted the situation sufficiently well.

I also asked myself the question about the consequences of being a being a female researcher of male dominated sports. It was clear that I was not ‘one of the guys’ and that fact certainly had an impact on what I was told (Woodward, 2008). But I am not sure how. I did not seem to be a threat for interviewees as there was no competitive atmosphere during the interviews. Rather, a friendly informative atmosphere prevailed where respondents spoke freely about their sports, its history, the conflicts and why it was impossible to regulate the sports without outside help. Only one respondent created a competitive atmosphere, but it was an intellectual battle. So, while I cannot be completely certain, my takeaway from the research experience is, that being female and an outsider of this sport dominated by men, was an advantage.

The question remains whether or not valid research of these sports can be done by an outsider. Am I, as a female and outsider, able to give plausible interpretations of how FCMACS are governed? In both cases I had had at least one check as described above, however a critical reflection on the position and role of the researches and a check by insiders could certainly improve the validity of the research.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 29 Chapter 1

Outline of this dissertation

In the following chapters the two case studies will be presented. Chapter two details how disciplinary technologies of power govern daily practices in the gym. The consequences for constructions of a ‘truth’ about boxing and related dominant categorization of inclusion and exclusion will be explained. In chapter three a more layered analysis of the practices of inclusion and exclusion in the gym will be described. Here applying the concept of governmentality reveals the different technologies of power that were in use at different places in the gym and the ambiguity that persisted about the ’truth’ about boxing. In chapter four the various regimes of practices that are in use in the deadlock in the governing of FCMACS will be set out. In chapter five possible ways of governing FCMACS are presented based on what stakeholders consider as the most important issues that need to be tackled. The last chapter of this dissertation will present answers to the questions of both case studies and the overall question of this dissertation. I will conclude with closing remarks.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 30 Introduction to research in Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 31 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 32 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 33 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 34 2 Regulation of diversity through discipline: Practices of inclusion and exclusion in boxing

Published as: Dortants, M. & Knoppers, A. (2013) Regulation of diversity through discipline: Practices of inclusion and exclusion in boxing. International Review for the Sociology of Sport. 48(5) 535–549.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 35 Chapter 2

Abstract

Boxing gyms in the Netherlands, which were traditionally bastions of ‘white’ men, have become more and more diverse. Since boxers with different ethnic backgrounds and women have joined boxing clubs, trainers need to manage this emerging diversity in their gyms. This empirical study of a gym in the Netherlands, where full participation of women is the norm, attempts to gain insights about practices of and experiences in the regulation of social inclusion and exclusion. We explore points of connection between Foucault’s conceptualization of regulation and disciplinary techniques and the regulatory and embodied practices of boxing. In this case study, observations and interviews were conducted to explore how trainers address diversity of members in training sessions and at matches. The results show how the participation of male and female boxers with different ethnic backgrounds was normalized by trainers. The gym, with a traditional hierarchical and patriarchal culture, enabled trainers to use disciplinary techniques to normalize their construction of what is normal in the gym. These trainers are not all-powerful, however, and had to negotiate their construction of boxers in interaction with others. The use of disciplinary techniques produced both uniformity and differentiation and, through an on-going process of negotiation, they defined who would be included or excluded.

Keywords

boxing, discipline, diversity, inclusion and exclusion, normalization

Introduction

A large body of research focusing on sport and non-profit organizations, and particularly research in the critical tradition, has provided an increased understanding of the often subtle and implicit mechanisms that reproduce and challenge practices of inclusion and exclusion (e.g. Claringbould, 2006, 2008; Elling, 2002; Knoppers, 2000; Knoppers and Anthonissen, 2006; Konrad et al., 2006). Relatively little attention has been paid however, to the regulation of diversity in organizations, to the changes in markers of difference and to the consequences for inclusion and exclusion of members. In this case study of practices at the ‘Box Club Gym’ (BCG) boxing club in the Netherlands, we focus on aspects of regulation of diversity that pertain to the claim of the head trainer that ethnicity and gender

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 36 Regulation of diversity through discipline: Practices of inclusion and exclusion in boxing

do not play a role in his disciplinary methods in his gym. We explore why and how trainers negotiate dominant understandings of gender and ethnicity in the BCG by using disciplinary techniques. Discipline is a key concept in boxing that informs the thinking and actions of both trainers and boxers (see for example Anthonissen and Dortants, 2006a, 2006b; Sugden, 1996; Wacquant, 1992, 1995, 2005; Woodward, 2008). Wacquant (1992) contends that the ‘training of the boxer is an intensive and exacting discipline that aims at transmitting, in a practical manner, by way of direct embodiment, a practical mastery of the fundamental corporeal, visual and mental schemata of boxing’ (p.237). The purpose of this paper is to explore how diversity is managed in daily practices in the BCG and the role disciplinary techniques play in that. The question that guided this research states: Which meanings do trainers assign to diversity and what does this imply for (managing) processes of inclusion and exclusion at the BCG?

Box Club Gym

Originally, boxing was a ‘white’ male sport in the Netherlands. Over the last few decades, many boxing clubs have ‘changed colour’, taking on more members who are immigrants (e.g. from Morocco, Turkey, Surinam, Caribbean) or have a refugee background (Africa). The BCG is a small and growing club with 40–50 members (aged 10–40). It is situated in an urban area of the Netherlands that has problems with drug dealing and related criminal activities. The club has no gym of its own. The club rents gyms from two different schools in two different parts of the city. Youngsters (10–14 years old) may train in one of the gyms in their neighbourhood two or three times a week. Seniors (14–40) train three times a week in the gym where a boxing ring, punching bags and boxing gloves can be stored. In order to survive, the BCG must become a full-fledged, successful club, that is, have a few members who are national or even international champions. Its current members come from Dutch as well as from other different, often mixed, ethnic backgrounds. This demographic make-up of the club reflects that of the (multi-ethnic) municipality where the club is situated. Besides ethnic diversity, the boxers vary in education level. Some have finished university, others have completed high school and some follow or have finished technical/practical education, which is the basic education level in the Netherlands. According to the senior trainer, many youngsters in this part of the city grow up in a single parent family, often with economical or other related problems.

In contrast to Wacquant’s (1992) observation about a boxing club in Chicago that

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 37 Chapter 2

‘needless to say, all members are men’ (p.234), the BCG has both male and female members who not only train recreationally, but also participate in organized (amateur) competition. This is remarkable for boxing, which until recently was seen and may still be seen by some as a sport suitable only for ‘real men’ (Boyle et al., 2006; Lafferty and McKay, 2004; Wacquant, 1992, 1995, 2005). Currently, three out of the eight competitive fighters at the BCG are female (25–30 years old). The most successful fighter in the club is a woman. She has a Dutch background and, like most of her fellow female boxers, is highly educated. The other female boxers have a Dutch or a mixed ethnic background. The number of boxers who participate in training sessions varies. There is a core group of boxers who regularly train at the club. At every training session, there are always a few individuals who will show up a few times but soon stop coming, a phenomenon Wacquant (1992) noted as well: ‘but most of them will stay no more than a few weeks, as they find the workout of the boxer too demanding’ (p.234). Those who leave are unable to muster the required discipline required for the practice sessions. Both male and female boxers can lead part of the training sessions under the supervision of a trainer, for example, the warm-up or the strength training. Young, motivated boxers (15–20 years old) assist the trainers when they train the young teenagers (10–15 years old). This is how these young boxers learn the ropes and get their first experience as trainers. The group of people training together in this one gym is, therefore, very diverse in terms of ethnicity, education level, age (especially in the senior group) and gender. This diversity needs to be managed by the trainers.

The BCG is a new club led by two head trainers. The most senior (67 years old) is a Dutch retired business executive, who is an experienced trainer and referee and well respected in the Dutch boxing scene. The core trainer is a recently retired (successful) professional boxer of Surinamese descent. Another trainer, also a successful ex-fighter with a Moroccan background, occasionally assists them. These three male trainers all boxed as either amateurs or professionals in national or international matches, so they all have a long history in the traditions of boxing in the Netherlands. They all have either a practical or regular high school diploma.

The concept of diversity as used in this study represents a multitude of opinions, meanings and identifications that may create markers for inclusion and exclusion associated with or different than those of a socio-demographic nature, and includes a specific focus on historically disadvantaged groups. We assume that the significance of differences for processes of exclusion and inclusion is contextual, situational and layered. Meanings, including those about differences, are negotiated in interactions between the stakeholders in a specific context (see Martin, 2002; Parker, 2000). These negotiated dominant meanings or ‘contested local meanings’

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 38 Regulation of diversity through discipline: Practices of inclusion and exclusion in boxing

(Parker, 2000: 81) determine what is considered ‘normal’ in a setting, who belongs, who is allowed to participate and who is not. How diversity is managed in an organization is determined by the temporary outcomes of such negotiations. According to Parker (2000) these are ‘contested processes of making claims about classification – about unity and division – suggesting that X is like us but Y is not’ (p.86). Verweel (2006) contends that the outcome of these negotiations shows which groups or individuals have power to make their meanings dominant and reflects the accompanying practices of inclusion and exclusion. These processes of classification are therefore not neutral: managers and trainers exercise power and have interests that influence negotiations of markers of difference.

Acker (1990, 1992) and Janssens and Zanoni (2005) argue that there is a relationship between the stated primary activity or core business of an organization and the markers of difference an organization considers relevant. Therefore, some socio- demographic differences are not necessarily relevant in a specific organization, but may become relevant if associated with the objectives the managers have set for the organization. The interests, ambitions, ideals and norms and values of the stakeholders determine the organizational objectives and the path towards achieving them. Since these may not be shared organization-wide, they are always negotiated even when management employs an authoritarian style. In the current case study we explore how trainers attempt to regulate differences and how they try to exercise power in order to favour only those differences that they consider relevant.

Foucault (1983) defined a relationship of power as an action by one person to help guide another’s conduct or direct the possible field of action of others. In contrast with his earlier work that assumed the production of docile bodies, in his later work Foucault assumed individuals have the ability to act independently; he defined an individual as one who presents her/himself in opposition to power structures. Foucault (1987) assumed that within relations of power ‘there is necessarily the possibility of resistance, for if there were no possibilities of resistance – of violent resistance, of escape, of ruse, of strategies that reverse the situation – there would be no relations of power’ (p.2). A relation of power, in contrast, even if unbalanced, is not a ‘system of domination which controls everything’ (Foucault, 1987: 13), but one that allows opportunity for freedom (Markula and Pringle, 2006: 36). In his later definition of power, Foucault (1987) assumed that subjects have the possibility of not just reacting to power, but of altering power relations as well. Foucault moved away from the assumption that power seemed to constitute individuals, without there being much opportunity to resist power, to an assumption that individuals have room to refuse the regulation of apparatuses of power (Moss, 1998:

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 39 Chapter 2

5). Construction and management of diversity should therefore be studied as ‘a process of struggle over conflicting ideas and interests’ (Omanovic, 2006: 84). The regulation of diversity can therefore be seen as the incorporation of a continuum of ‘unity and diversity’ that are influenced by existing power relations. The dynamics of power construct diversity and bring management of diversity into being (Janssens and Zanoni, 2005). Similarly, trainers have goals, ambitions and values that may match or conflict with those of their boxers. The regulation of differences in a boxing club setting requires trainers and boxers, therefore, to negotiate that which is shared (and therefore generally accepted as normal), and that which is ‘different’ and may not be accepted.

Although Foucault’s concept of discipline originates from his earlier work, we draw on his notion of disciplinary normalization that is ‘sensitive to both the productive and the limiting effects of power’ (Ahonen and Tienari, 2009: 675; see also Foldy, 2002) to analyse power relations embedded in the discipline-building techniques used by trainers that produce unity and difference, inclusion and exclusion. This analysis should provide insight into how disciplinary power, including the power to define what is normal and abnormal, exercised upon the body might normalize and thereby enable and limit diversity. We describe and analyse everyday practices at micro level, that is, the local practice in the BCG, paying attention to asymmetrical power relations and self- evident assumptions and beliefs that operate at micro level to understand the layers (front stage and back stage), complexity and contradictions of everyday practices.

Methodology

We selected an amateur boxing club (the BCG) that was socio-demographically diverse with respect to gender and ethnicity. The current study is part of a larger study (2008–2010) on managing diversity in which 30 observations were held between 2008 and 2010 during training sessions, matches, galas and national martial arts days with many informal talks with trainers and boxers. The observations were corded as field notes. Besides observations, 15 formal interviews were held with three male and three female boxers, their three male trainers (senior and core trainer three times during that period) and a sport consultant who was involved (two times). The boxers that were interviewed were from Dutch, African and mixed ethnic backgrounds and had different levels of education. We focused on dominant and contested meanings about diversity, ambitions, ideals, motives and interests of both trainers and boxers.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 40 Regulation of diversity through discipline: Practices of inclusion and exclusion in boxing

In the current study we explored how trainers managed diversity (e.g. ethnicity, gender, age, education level). We read all the texts based on the interviews and observations obtained throughout the investigation. We analysed the data using the inductive analytical method (Strauss and Corbin, 1990). We subsequently made an initial inductive analysis of the markers of difference that seemed to be relevant or significant to the trainers, as evidenced by their explanations of their practices and by our observations. Next, we analysed the reasons why these markers of difference held significance for the trainers. The analysis revealed how certain markers were negotiated and in some cases accepted as dominant markers of difference that determined practices of inclusion and exclusion in the gym. We used an iterative reading and rereading process of the data to identify meaningful quotes pertaining to the use of disciplinary techniques to manage diversity. Those quotes that seemed to suggest the same meaning were grouped together. We compared each quote with the others to find a group of best fit. We used inductive reasoning to modify our tentative hypotheses about the relationship between the uses of disciplinary technique to manage diversity. We assume that the resulting description represents the ways in which these trainers made sense of their practices to manage diversity in the BCG.

Dominant norms and values

The main ambition of the two head trainers of the BCG is to develop champions at the national and international level. This is seen as the best way to gain status and respectability in the world of boxing. In addition, these trainers are convinced that the practice of boxing can make a significant contribution to the development of discipline in young people. The trainers themselves regard the discipline they learned through boxing as a major factor in their own achievement of (social) success. They are very pleased when one of their boxers achieves success, but they also ‘glow’ with pride when a young adult who used to be trained by them drops by and tells them about his or her successful career in another field (field notes, 21 April 2008). In the eyes of the core trainer, this success, too, is ‘partly due to what they learned in boxing.’

Boxers at the BCG tend not to speak in terms of friendship as a reason for membership in the club. They all have their own goals. Some want to become good boxers, while others want to lose weight, get in shape or work on a well-toned physique. A trainer and boxer begin to develop a relationship when a boxer shows he or she is willing to put their all into achieving their goals. A male boxer with a refugee

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 41 Chapter 2

background (17 years old) explains how this works:

The trainer just helps you with that [achieving goals]. He’s the kind of guy who says ‘You know what, if you really start doing your best, then I’ll help you.’ So I started training and he started spending time with me.

This relationship is built on a mutual, often implicit, agreement that the trainer gives the boxer individual training and advice and the boxer shows that he or she is 100 percent committed and will go to great lengths to reach the stated goals.

The trainer’s involvement with boxers goes beyond the boxing club since ‘I wouldn’t be a very good trainer if my supervision stopped at the ring.’ In light of the background and often difficult home situation (broken families, financial or addiction problems) of some of the (young) male and female boxers, this means ‘…you’re so involved with someone that creates a certain bond, and then you start to see and recognize some things. ’ These trainers often feel like a father to the teenagers. For boxers, the personal attention they receive can be a reason to stay. ‘So then I thought: “actually, that man is paying more attention to me and stuff”, you know, so I’m going to stick with this for a while’ (refugee background, male, 17 years old). This focus on the individual seems to contrast sharply with the hierarchical relationships and the uniform drills that characterize training sessions. There are clear and explicit rules, especially for the very young beginners: do as the trainer says and do not talk, especially when the trainer is talking. Boxers are expected to be totally committed. Trainers see discipline as an important criterion in deciding whether to commit to and develop a relationship with a boxer.

The meaning of discipline at the BCG

Discipline is a key concept in the world of boxing. ‘Boxing bodies are saturated by disciplinary techniques and are highly regulated and self-disciplined through a set of routine practices and mechanisms’ (Woodward, 2008: 541). Many boxers and trainers see discipline as the most important characteristic of a good boxer (see also Anthonissen and Dortants, 2006a). Discipline is mentioned often by the trainers at the BCG, especially in the sense of intensive and diligent physical training. Here, physical discipline means religiously sticking to a training schedule, training hard, giving your all and following the trainer’s instructions (including roadwork to improve endurance). The results of physical discipline are publicly visible in improved muscle tone, greater endurance and flexibility and ‘good’ technique;

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 42 Regulation of diversity through discipline: Practices of inclusion and exclusion in boxing

discipline can even be measured on the weigh scales. A disciplined boxer is always dieting and weighs him or herself regularly on the scales at the gym. In addition, boxers are expected to avoid alcohol and drugs. They must lead a structured and organized life and make sure they have sufficient rest and sleep. The trainer tries to keep an eye on this (outside the club as well as inside) and to confront boxers who do not show ‘sufficient discipline’. Social discipline also plays a role. According to the core trainer, discipline also means the ability to obey: ‘… that’s part of boxing training. That’s boxing. You come in and you shut up, you train, you do what the trainer tells you to do, that’s just discipline.’ Those who do not stick to the trainer’s rules are called to task and, if necessary, punished. Trainers are convinced of the effect ‘… Next time he’ll think twice before he risks looking bad in front of the others doing 100 or 50 push-ups’ (part-time trainer). This type of punishment is considered normal and an effective disciplinary action. Trainers are also aware that the reality on the streets is different. The part- time trainer says:

Out there [on the streets], you don’t listen, you just do things. But here, if you’re late for training, you have to do 50 push-ups, regardless. No, they don’t accept that [discipline] out there, but here, in front of the group, they do.

These trainers think discipline and respect are linked. Trainers believe that a well- disciplined boxer respects everyone, regardless of gender or ethnic background. Specifically, respect for someone else means that a boxer should be able and willing to train, practice and spar with all boxers and to adapt to the level, strength and skills of the opponent. The trainers say this is a skill that must be learned (see also Wacquant, 1992: 242). For this reason, a new male boxer is at first not allowed to spar with a female who may weigh less and be less strong. According to the trainers, male newcomers show insufficient discipline and do not want to lose face because ‘you can’t let yourself be beaten by a woman!’. The link between discipline and respect is also related to discipline in of self-control, both inside and outside the boxing club. The senior trainer explains that

[a] boxer will never provoke a fight in the streets, because he knows his strength, he knows what he’s doing. People who’ve never learned martial arts tend to mouth off, to say ‘I’m gonna beat you up.’ A boxer knows what he’s doing because he’s learned self-control, discipline. In here you box, out there you behave.

This emphasis on self-control inside and outside this boxing club in the Netherlands

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 43 Chapter 2

is similar to what Wacquant (1995) found in his long-term study of a boxing club in Chicago. Wacquant (1995) concluded that boxing at a gym can facilitate a small- scale ‘civilizing machine’, where boxers are taught to control and normalize their behaviour (see also Sugden, 1996: 183). This similarity in emphasis suggests a globalization of a dominant discourse about the value of learning to box.

This emphasis means trainers try to guide boxers in their thinking and actions, so that the way they live and act will be congruent with the trainers’ ideas of well- disciplined boxers and citizens. Discipline in the BCG means that boxers adapt to what the boxing trainers see as normal behaviour within the sport and as accepted/ successful behaviour outside – at school or work – and that this behaviour is continuously normalized. The trainers insist that boxers who live in an environment in which they are surrounded by (drug-related) crime may not engage in criminal activities. If, for example, a boxer is suspected of using or dealing drugs, he or she is expelled from the boxing club and is no longer allowed on the premises (field notes 11 March 2009).

Discipline and the body as the point of application

These boxing trainers claim they use discipline to construct a definition of formal equality that serves as a basis for managing (diversity in) the club. They argue that discipline creates uniformity, since everyone is equal and is treated equally. The core trainer says:

Everyone is the same, colour doesn’t matter. We treat everyone the same, I think. Discipline, when you enter the Gym, you just shut up. There is just person who speaks and that’s the trainer. And you just do what he says.

Our observations suggest this discipline creates differences at the individual level, however. Boxers are considered equal as long as they work and live in a disciplined manner. During all parts of the joint training all have to do the same thing at the same time. Only boxers who need to be prepared for matches receive more attention from trainers, especially during sparring sessions. This exception to ‘everyone is equal and gets equal attention’ is explained to the other boxers. ‘She has an important boxing match this weekend, so she gets more opportunities and attention during sparring’ (field notes 30 November 2009). Trainers also distinguish boxers who behave and work in a disciplined manner from those who do not. Undisciplined boxers receive negative or less attention or are completely ignored.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 44 Regulation of diversity through discipline: Practices of inclusion and exclusion in boxing

Since we view managing diversity as managing the balance between unity and difference, we subsequently explore how discipline in this boxing club creates markers for inclusion and exclusion.

Foucault (1977) ascribes the success of disciplinary power to the use of simple tools: the hierarchical look, the normalizing sanction and the combination of both in a discipline-specific procedure: the examination. ‘Hierarchical observation reflects the connection between visibility and power: a visible body is a knowable body that can subsequently become subject to the workings of power’ (Foucault, 1977: 177). Markula and Pringle (2006: 41) have applied this notion to sport: ‘Through hierarchical observation, for example, a coach can implement additional workouts for the unfit, skill sessions for the unskilled and punishing drills for the tardy.’

The senior trainer at the BCG regularly compares a boxer’s discipline with military discipline. ‘It is just like the army, listen and obey or we need to do some extra roadwork.’ Wacquant (1992) also described how boxers compare themselves to soldiers. The use of this metaphor reflects Foucault’s (1977) notion about discipline ‘with the body as object and target of power’ (p.136). In learning discipline, ‘the body is manipulated, shaped, trained, which obeys, responds, becomes skilful and increases its forces’ and as such ‘makes it more obedient as it becomes more useful, and conversely’ (Foucault, 1977: 136–138). There are similarities between the discipline-building techniques described by Foucault and those used by the trainers at the BCG before, during and after their training sessions. At every training session, trainers use the technique of spreading individuals across the available space. At the start of the training session, everyone must be in their own spot, so that ‘each individual has his own place; and each place its individual’ (Foucault, 1977: 143). As Foucault (1977) puts it: ‘Avoid distributions in groups; break up collective dispositions’ since ‘[I]t establishes over individuals a visibility through which one differentiates them and judges them’ (p.184). Assignment of people to individual spaces makes it possible for these trainers to control every individual while simultaneously keeping everyone occupied (and productive) (Foucault, 1977). The trainers disrupt friendships, including those based on ethnicity or gender, by assigning every individual his or her own place, at a distance from each other. The boxers must all focus on the trainer and not on each other. The trainer chooses a position or moves around the gym, enabling him to see and judge everyone. The trainers ensure that there is little contact between boxers unless they have to do a drill together. If boxers try to move out of the trainer’s field of vision in order to chat, or not take part, for instance, then the trainer issues a clear warning and assigns them a different spot (several field notes 2008–2010).

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 45 Chapter 2

Foucault (1977) contended that corrective punishment consisting of ‘subtle procedures, ranging from light physical punishment to minor deprivations and petty humiliations’ (p.178) enables the functioning of a disciplinary system. It is not surprising then that during the training sessions at the BCG, laziness, disobedience and talking back are the main infractions for which individuals and the group are punished for deviating from the required behaviour (norm). A boxer is disciplined at the BCG with the use of private or public reprimands, extra push-ups for the offender (in front of the rest of the group) and, if neither of these methods helps, temporary exclusion (being sent to the bench) (e.g. field notes 29 April 2008; 11 March 2009; 30 November 2009).

Yet punishment is not the only mechanism that is used to normalize behaviour. The system must also incorporate rewards/gratification and, in fact, must try to use reward more so than punish (Foucault, 1977). Likewise, the boxing trainers involved in the current study regularly use rewards. A trainer, for example, promised a teenager who wanted to lose weight that he would get boxing gloves if he lost a pre-determined amount of weight by the end of the season (field notes 27 May 2008). Similarly, a well-disciplined boxer was entered in a competition while an undisciplined boxer was not allowed to do this. The trainers also rewarded publicly. For example, a trainer gave a small prize (a set of wraps) to the boxer who showed the most dedication during an afternoon training (field notes 22 February 2008).

This mechanism of punishment and reward enables a number of operations that are intended to normalize behaviour through disciplinary action. Behaviour and performance are defined based on dualistic notions of good and bad. The outcome of political and social debates and academic insights influence that which is defined as normal and abnormal (Foucault, 1977). In addition, this mechanism enables quantification and hence the ability to distinguish and differentiate between individuals. Disciplinary institutions normalize. In a sense, the normalizing power of a norm enforces uniformity, but at the same time it individualizes by measuring deviations, setting levels, instilling specific skills and harnessing differences by coordinating them. Similarly, Wacquant (1992) concludes that ‘the culture at a boxing gym is self-consciously egalitarian in that all participants are treated basically alike: irrespective of their status and goal, they all have the same rights and the same duties, particular that of “working” hard at their trade and displaying a modicum of ring bravery when called for’ (p.234). This disciplinary mechanism is subtle and is assumed to develop discipline over time. Wacquant (1992) explains that

[T]o become a boxer is to appropriate through progressive impregnation a set of bodily and mental dispositions that are so intimately interwoven that

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 46 Regulation of diversity through discipline: Practices of inclusion and exclusion in boxing

they erase the distinction between the physical and the spiritual, between what pertains to athletic ‘talent’ and what belongs to moral capacities and will (p. 224).

Ambiguous meanings of gender and ethnicity Everyone can become a ‘good’ boxer in this gym: gender and ethnic background are not relevant according to the trainers. Discrimination is not tolerated. They strive to create a respectful situation in the gym. During training sessions everyone has to adhere to the rules set by the senior trainer. Even the other trainers stick to these rules and apply them during the sessions they supervise. The senior trainer shapes the current norms and values in the boxing club. He has influenced the dominant meanings about ethnicity and gender embedded in these norms and values – meanings determined to a great extent by his past. ‘No one can say anything negative about anyone, of any skin colour, religion or whatever, because I’ll get in their face … I learned that from my parents. My dad mostly. ’ Thus religion or ethnicity may not be used to discriminate against anyone at the gym. In fact, ethnic background is considered to be totally irrelevant at the gym (see also Wacquant, 1995 on this). Uniformity is the leading principle and is maintained through disciplinary techniques. Members are not allowed to form a group with others from the same ethnic background or to talk in any language other than Dutch during training sessions. Those who violate this norm are publicly reprimanded and punished (several observations 2008–2010). Some boxers are attracted to this boxing club precisely because ethnic cliques are not allowed. Boxers and trainers feel the boxing club handles ethnic diversity better than other sports clubs and organizations. During training sessions and matches, trainers strive to maintain this norm of ethnic neutrality. However, remarks about ethnicity do occur so strict ethnic neutrality is not achieved. For example, a boxer with a Dutch background told us that when someone is late, the subsequent teasing is ethnic related. In general, however, members and trainers of the club pride themselves on ethnic neutrality despite their socio-demographic diversity.

Similarly, another desired value is gender neutrality. The prevailing norm in the BCG is that everyone is equal and that women are very welcome in this until now male- dominated world. This is in contrast to the sport’s history in which boxing was a sport very resistant to female involvement (Sugden, 1996: 192), so that women were absent or marginalized in gyms (Lafferty and McKay, 2004; Wacquant, 1995). In the BCG, women and men are expected to train and spar together. Heated debates have

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 47 Chapter 2

occurred whenever a man has refused to spar with a woman. A male boxer who did not want to spar with women left and did not return (field notes 21 April 2008). During the training sessions, women and men are treated as equals. Sometimes women even receive more attention because they have to be prepared for fights more often than men. Female and male boxers are asked to lead part of the training session. At first, a female boxer (mixed ethnic background) was surprised that the boxers obeyed her. ‘When I lead those short strength training sessions, I think “why in the world would they listen to a girl?”’ This does not mean that ‘being a woman’ is always without meaning or neutral.

The construct of femininity and masculinity are layered and full of potential contradictions (Connell and Messerschmidt, 2005: 853). Although these trainers stress that they do not distinguish between men and women (both can be disciplined boxers), femininity was noted and expressed often in contradiction to the prevailing norms in the world of boxing. Before a boxer competes, the fighter gets a new uniform that the trainer has selected and bought specifically for him or her. For women these outfits are not automatically the usual ‘male’ outfits consisting of big shorts and tank tops but of short culottes with matching tight tank tops. A female boxer (mixed ethnic background, 25 years old) expressed her appreciation for this individual attention. ‘It meant a lot to me that the trainer came to the fight with those skirts for me.’ Another female boxer preferred and received a more traditional male outfit. The trainer does not select uniforms for only women. He also selects matching outfits for the men that are more individualized than the usual boxing uniforms. He does, however, explicitly distinguish between men’s and women’s uniforms by choosing outfits according to gender, an uncommon practice in Dutch boxing. By doing so he risks a conflict with the Dutch boxing association, because his choice of women’s uniforms always pushes the limits of what boxers are allowed to wear in the ring. He accepts the resulting confrontations because he believes women should be allowed to look feminine and should not enter the ring looking like men. Thus, although the trainers profess gender neutrality in their treatment of the members, they also differentiate between women and men, so their meaning of femininity is ambiguous.

Differences between men and women do become significant, however, when the senior trainer discusses possible future successes of members. According to him each trainer dreams that one of their boxers goes to the Olympic Games. This is more difficult to achieve with male boxers because the competition is stiff, particularly with boxers from former Eastern bloc countries. The dream seems more attainable with a female boxer because there are fewer fighters and hence less competition at both the national and international levels. The senior trainer says:

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 48 Regulation of diversity through discipline: Practices of inclusion and exclusion in boxing

I’d be very happy if I could go to London [Olympics] in 2012 with one or two girls. That’s my whole ambition. If one of the boys could go too … yes, of course, with a boy it’s exactly the same, but the boys are so run of the mill. For me, that’s the kick: getting the girls to the point where they qualify internationally and that they can compete in a top quality fight.

According to the senior trainer, female boxers also have a greater chance at achieving success because they show more discipline and work harder than men. Obviously then, although the trainers profess to be gender neutral, this neutrality was situational and only the trainers could transgress or disrupt its boundaries.

Negotiation about who belongs in this gym

The trainers use discipline-building techniques to exercise power over the boxers to normalize and create disciplined (successful) boxers who show respect for everyone, regardless gender or ethnic background. However, as Foucault (1983) argued in his later work, this is not a totalitarian power, but rather a continuous negotiation between the stakeholders about what is normal and accepted in a particular context. These boxers do not completely submit to the trainers: there is room for resistance.

In our analysis of the ways the norms for desirable behaviour were negotiated and/ or shifted, we differentiate between interactions between individuals that occur front stage (in public) or are more individual encounters (back stage). The outcome of these negotiations is largely dependent on the place where this occurs. In public, the trainer gives clear and unambiguous instructions as to how everyone is expected to behave at the BCG. However, behind the scenes (out of the public eye) these rules may be adjusted to make the front stage work run more smoothly. The trainers at the BCG are obviously in charge in the public setting. Their value system, which includes their occasional ambiguous definitions of gender and ethnicity, is dominant and determines whether a boxer is accepted into the club or not (see also Sugden, 1996: 183). The senior trainer considers physical and social discipline to be the most important marker of difference for boxers and hence for their inclusion or exclusion. The trainers want well-disciplined boxers because they can achieve success with such boxers and gain respectability in terms of both performance (champions) and enhancing the reputation of boxing (and the BCG) as a means of keeping teenagers and young adults off the streets. Anybody who adheres to this norm is welcome.

Negotiations are much more subtle during personal interactions (back stage). All 49

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 49 Chapter 2

trainers attempt to guide the boxer’s behaviour by talking to him or her before, during and after a training session or by calling them between sessions. Each trainer tries to persuade and admonish the boxers to follow the rules and when necessary helps them as much as possible and uses rewards to exert his influence. Yet the boxer also has power in the relationship with the trainer and attempts to influence the way in which he or she has to train, box and live. Boxers accomplish this by talking, persuading or ignoring the trainer’s instructions until he or she is reprimanded or punished. In these negotiations, the trainer always tries to maintain or strengthen his relationship with the boxer and to take the boxer’s (ethnic) background, gender and current situation into account. At the same time, the senior trainer also tries not to deviate too much from his insistence on uniform behaviour. Trainers seek to reach a balance between unity and diversity by allowing more room for diversity in personal contacts back stage.

Conclusion

Boxing trainers in this gym continue to do what they used to do: disciplining youngsters and producing champions. Using disciplinary techniques they produce boxers who live, train and think like real disciplined boxers, a condition to be a champion. This study of a boxing gym in the Netherlands uses a Foucauldian approach to explore how disciplinary techniques at the micro level are applied and how these techniques normalize thinking and acting in the gym. The gym, traditionally with a hierarchical and patriarchal culture, enables trainers through the use of these disciplinary techniques to make their construction of what is normal in the gym dominant. However, trainers are not omnipotent and (following Foucault) they need to make their constructions dominant through their interactions (and negotiations) with others. We acknowledge that these male trainers are in a favoured position to enforce their construction. This enables them to construct boxing as a sport for everyone, regardless of ethnic background or gender. The only marker of difference that counts in this gym for the inclusion and exclusion of members seemed to be being disciplined in accordance with the norms of the trainers.

This case study of the BCG further offers insight into processes and mechanisms of regulation of diversity. The results show that what is constructed as ‘normal’ is not static and robust. For example, strong fixed meanings about women and boxing changed when circumstances changed. Women’s boxing became accepted and more and more lucrative for Dutch trainers, since female boxers can take part in the Olympic Games. According to Connell (2005: 1801) ‘Men are, however, necessarily involved in

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 50 Regulation of diversity through discipline: Practices of inclusion and exclusion in boxing

gender-equality reform.’ Furthermore, the ethnical diversification of the population of Dutch cities and the popularity of boxing by this new group of inhabitants made it imperative to include them in their often ailing organization. Contextual changes can result in changes in goals, ambitions and the definition of groups to be involved. These findings suggest that markers of difference can change, for ideological reasons, but also to accomplish the (opportunistic) goals of stakeholders. The results show also that trainers play an important role in these changes. They can use their influence to change markers of difference, at least front stage. This enables a change in the traditional (white) male-only composition of members of a boxing club, and historically disadvantaged groups (women and ethnic minorities) can gain access as full participants. Some boxers fit into this relatively newly defined situation and others do not fit (any more) into ‘how we do things here’, so they leave or are sent home by trainers. Therefore, those who used to be privileged and cannot conform could be excluded in this new situation.

The use of disciplinary techniques produces both uniformity and differentiation in the gym. The use of these techniques is part of the heroic of successful boxers and fits the discursive tradition and culture of boxing. In this context, disciplinary techniques are used to define and change markers of difference. This finding suggests that traditions and cultures do not always need to change for transitions to occur, although cultures and traditions can also be used for change in (sport) organizations. These techniques can be used, therefore, to change markers of difference in this context because they connect with own traditions and culture.

The findings suggest that regulation of diversity is not confined to coordinating diversity as Verweel and De Ruijter (2000) indicate, but consists of a power play between all involved about defining the dominant construction of what is normal at the micro level in an (sport) organization. This includes balancing and negotiating meanings of sameness and difference and who should be included and who not. These (re) constructions reflect relations of power in which tools are used that fit in the specific context, such as discipline in this gym. Yet each organization could be defined as an arena where everyone is involved but does not have the same power to define the dominant definition of sameness and diversity.

Funding This research has been carried out in the framework of the research program Sport: Passion, Practice & Profit 2007–2010 financed by the Ministry of Public Health, Welfare and Sport, The Netherlands.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 51 Chapter 2

References

Acker J (1990) Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: A theory of gendered organizations. Gender and Society 4: 139– 158. Acker J (1992) Gendering organizational theory. In: Mills AJ and Tancred P (eds) Gendering Organizational Analysis. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE, pp. 248–262. Ahonen P and Tienari J (2009) United in diversity? Disciplinary normalization in an EU project. Organization 16: 655–679. Anthonissen A and Dortants M (2006a) Respect voor Discipline. Een studie naar identificaties van getalenteerde boksers [Respect for Discipline: A Study of Identities of Talented Boxers]. Amsterdam: Uitgeverij SWP. Anthonissen A and Dortants M (2006b) Sociale diversiteit en de roep om respect. Een studie naar identificaties van mannelijke sportbestuurders [Social Diversity and Respect: A Study of Identities of Male Boxers]. Amsterdam: Uitgeverij SWP. Boyle E, Millington B and Vertinsky P (2006) Representing the female pugilist: Narratives of race, gender and disability in Million dollar baby. Sociology of Sport Journal 23: 99–116. Connell RW (2005) Change among the gatekeepers: Men, masculinities, and gender equality in the global arena. Journal of women in culture and society 30: 1801–1825. Connell RW and Messerschmidt J (2005) Hegemonic masculinity: Rethinking the concept. Gender & Society 19: 829–859. Claringbould I (2006) Vrouwen in zicht. Over de positie van vrouwen en mannen in sportbesturen [Women in View: The Position of Women and Men in Sport Governance]. Nieuwegein: Arko Sports Media. Claringbould I (2008) Mind the Gap: The Layered Reconstruction of Gender in Sport Related Organizations. Nieuwegein: Arko Sports Media. Elling A (2002) Ze zijn er [niet] voor gebouwd. In- en uitsluiting in de sport naar sekse en etniciteit [They were not made for this: Gender and Ethnic Inclusion and Exclusion in Sport]. Nieuwegein: Arko Sports Media. Foldy E (2002) Managing diversity: Identity and power in organizations. In: Aaltio I and Mills A (eds) Gender, Identity and the Culture of Organizations. London: Routledge, pp. 92–112. Foucault M (1977) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (Trans. Sheridan A, first published in 1975 as Surveiller et punir: Naissance de la prison. Paris: Gallimard). London: Penguin Books Ltd. Foucault M (1983) The subject and power. In: Dreyfus H and Rabinow P (eds) Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics, 2nd ed. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 208–226. Foucault M (1987) The ethic of care for the self as a practice of freedom. In: Bernauer J and Rasmussen D (eds) The Final Foucault. Cambridge, MA: MIT University Press, pp. 1–20. Janssens M and Zanoni P (2005) Many diversities for many services: Theorizing diversity (management) in service companies. Human Relations 58: 311–340. Knoppers A (ed.) (2000) The Construction Meaning in Sport Organizations: Management of Diversity. Maastricht: Shaker Publishing BV. Knoppers A and Anthonissen A (eds) (2006) Making Sense of Diversity in Organizing Sport. Oxford: Meyer & Meyer Sport. Konrad A, Prasad P and Pringle J (eds) (2006) Handbook of Workplace Diversity. London: SAGE. Lafferty Y and McKay J (2004) Suffragettes in satin shorts? Gender and competitive boxing. Qualitative Sociology 27(3): 249–276.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 52 Regulation of diversity through discipline: Practices of inclusion and exclusion in boxing

Markula P and Pringle R (2006) Foucault, Sport and Exercise: Power, Knowledge and Transforming the Self. London and New York: Routledge. Martin J (2002) Organizational Culture: Mapping the Terrain. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Moss J (eds) (1998) The Later Foucault: Politics and Philosophy. London: SAGE. Omanovic V (2006) A Production of Diversity: Appearance, Ideas, Actions, Contradictions and Praxis. Göteborg: BAS Publishing. Parker M (2000) Organizational Culture and Identity. London: SAGE. Strauss A and Corbin J (1990) Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE. Sugden J (1996) Boxing and Society: An International Analysis. Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press. Verweel P (2006) Sense making in sport organizations. In: Knoppers A and Anthonissen A (eds) Making Sense of Diversity in Organizing Sport. Oxford: Meyer & Meyer Sport, pp. 18–28. Verweel P and De Ruijter A (2000) Perspectives on organization and society. In: Knoppers A (ed.) The Construction Meaning in Sport Organizations: Management of Diversity. Maastricht: Shaker Publishing BV, pp. 25–40. Wacquant L (1992) The social logic of boxing in black Chicago: Toward a sociology of boxing. Sociology of Sport Journal 9: 221–254. Wacquant L (1995) The pugilistic point of view: How boxers think and feel about their trade. Theory and Society 24: 489–535. Wacquant L (2005) Carnal connections: On embodiment, apprenticeship and membership. Qualitative Sociology 28: 445–474. Woodward K (2008) Hanging out and hanging about: Insider/outsider research in the sport of boxing. Ethnography 9: 536.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 53 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 54 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 55 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 56 3 The organization of diversity in a boxing club: governmentality and entangled rationalities

Published as: Dortants, M. & Knoppers, A. (2016) The organization of diversity in a boxing club: Governmentality and entangled rationalities. Culture and Organization. 22 (3) 245-261.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 57 Chapter 3

Abstract

This study answers a recent call for research on the complexity, locality, and use of power in the governing of diversity in organizations. We used the concepts of governmentality and of governing sameness and difference to explore multiple and heterogeneous ways of regulating gender diversity in organizations. Governmentality was defined as interrelated ways of reasoning and of using technologies of power within a boxing organization. We found that in their management of the full participation of women, participants used both sport and gender rationalities, each of which relied on different technologies of power in specific settings. Ambiguous meanings were strategically used to manage the participation of women in boxing and to maintain heroic masculine practices.

Keywords

governmentality; diversity; gender; rationalities; technologies of power; boxing

Introduction

In surveying the research on diversity in organizations, many scholars have called for the further development of and/or new directions in such research (Zanoni et al. 2010; Ghorashi and Sabelis 2013; Ahonen et al. 2014; Gotsis and Kortezi 2015). They argue that critical diversity research – driven by social justice concerns over domination, coercion, and hierarchy, and often focused on evaluating policy outcomes, a practice shaped by a business rationale – is inadequate for addressing the regulation of diversity. They contend that such research fails to address or conceptualize power and context, and propose that an objective of diversity research should be to explore how power operates in the production of knowledge about diversity and how location plays a role in how diversity is managed. Zanoni et al. (2010, 17) argue for more empirical investigations of organizational diversity ‘because discursive micro-analyses are important to shed light on interstitial, everyday forms of resistance’.

This study investigates how power works in the regulation of gender diversity at the micro level. Specifically, we analyse a sport organization – a boxing club – where gender diversity is explicitly managed, and we discuss the ways of reasoning (rationalities) about sport and gender that are manifest in this setting and how they

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 58 The organization of diversity in a boxing club: governmentality and entangled rationalities

become intertwined. These partly entangled rationalities give rise to a particular regulation of gender diversity. To demonstrate this, we first explore the concept of governmentality and constructions of sameness and difference, and describe the social organization of boxing. We then introduce the study site, the Boxing Club Gym (BCG) and its context and clarify the methodology used. In the results and in the discussion section, we describe and discuss the rationalities that govern diversity in BCG and show how trainers and boxers deal with ambiguous and conflicting rationalities.

Governmentality and the negotiation of sameness and differences

In this study, we use a broad meaning of the term ‘governmentality’ to refer to that which deals with the art of government. We also draw upon Dean’s (2010, 27) research on governmentality, which explores how thought works in ways of organizing and within regimes of practices, and the effects that are produced. Specifically, this research explores how various forms of thought employ particular techniques and tactics to direct the conduct of the governed (Dean 2010, 24 - 30). Studies of governmentality focus mainly on society- and state-level issues (see e.g. Miller and Rose 2008 ; Bröckling, Krasmann, and Lemke 2011), whereas we use this concept to analyse the use of power in negotiating sameness and differences at the micro level. Dean’s work provides an analytical framework for untangling the multiple and heterogeneous practices of management, control, and resistance in organizations. We analyse multiple ways of thinking and doing within an organization, conceptualized as interrelated rationalities and technologies of (self-) government.

Dean (2010, 27) explains that ‘studies of governmentality are more concerned with how thought operates within our organized ways of doing things, our regimes of practices, and with its ambitions and effects’. Such ‘regimes of practices’ are institutional practices, that is, they comprise the routinized and ritualized way that things are done in certain places and at certain times. These regimes can be analysed along the interrelated dimensions of technologies (techne) and thought (episteme), through which governing operates (Dean 2010). Techne of government asks, according to Dean (2010, 42), ‘by what means, mechanisms, procedures, instruments, tactics, techniques, technologies, and vocabularies is authority constituted and rule accomplished’. Thoughts, or rationalities, are the forms of thinking, knowledge, expertise, strategies, and calculations that are employed in

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 59 Chapter 3

practices of government. A ‘thought’ or ‘rationality’, then, is ‘any way of reasoning, or way of thinking about, calculating and responding to a problem, which is more or less systematic, and which may draw upon formal bodies of knowledge or expertise’ (Dean 2010, 24). In the current study, ‘rationalities’ pertain to ‘the truths of boxing’, meaning the forms of knowledge or reasoning about the ‘real’ art of boxing upon which trainers and boxers model themselves and base their rhetoric.

Rationalities (thinking) and technologies (doing) are related. Rationalities become operable when they have become instrumental (Miller and Rose 2008, 16). Trainers tend to have a privileged position in the hierarchical controlled gym, based on their experience; they claim that their knowledge or rationalities about boxing have the status of ‘the truth’. Others may resist those claims. Power struggles concern which rationalities and accompanying technologies are leading in this hierarchical controlled boxing gym, including the relevance of certain constructions of sameness and difference.

We link the concept of governmentality to the regulation of diversity by focusing on how ‘truth’ about gender diversity is regulated with the use of technologies of power in boxing gyms. New truths that assume boxing is a sport for both women and men spur negotiations over sameness and difference inside the organization. These meanings are contested, creating inclusion and exclusion, since there are always competing understandings of what should define an organization (Parker 2000). The manner in which diversity is regulated may be unique for any specific (boxing) organization, but, at the same time, it may also share features with other (boxing) organizations. Each gym has its specific manifestation of these influences on the construction of meanings. What becomes relevant for constructions of sameness and difference can be contested and therefore negotiated.

Combining the concept of governmentality with a recognition of constructions of sameness and difference enables us to analyse multiple and heterogeneous ways of regulating diversity in the gym, including different types of agency and authority that shape how trainers and boxers deal with diversity. Boxing gyms are suited for diversity research for two reasons. First, martial arts organizations, including the gym studied, assume that mechanisms for regulating diversity are embedded within the historical– cultural routines of their sport. Wacquant (2004, 10), for example, shows that diversity in boxing gyms is regulated by a purported egalitarian ethos, based on ‘the so called colour-blindness of pugilistic culture... such that everyone is fully accepted into it as long as he submits to the common discipline and “pays his dues” in the ring’. He describes the culture of the gym as ostensibly egalitarian in the sense that all participants are treated alike:

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 60 The organization of diversity in a boxing club: governmentality and entangled rationalities

whatever their status and their ambitions, they all enjoy the same rights and must acquit themselves of the same duties, particularly that of ‘working’ hard at their craft and displaying a modicum of bravery between the ropes when the time comes. (53)

Similarly, research on boxing in the Netherlands suggests that constructions of sameness and difference often associated with diversity, such as ethnicity, religion, and social background, are understood as irrelevant within the setting of boxing gyms (Anthonissen and Dortants 2006; Dortants and Knoppers 2013). Underlying this rationality of equality seems to be the assumption that meanings given to sociocultural/demographic characteristics are stable, unequivocal, and consistent. This ‘egalitarian ethos’ is not as straightforward or equal as it seems; however, since, until recently, it generally has excluded women.

Second, the question of gender and the boxing gym is intriguing. Although women’s participation in competitive boxing is not new (see Van Ingen 2013; Gems and Pfister 2014 for a history of women’s boxing), the full integration of women into boxing is. While gender inclusiveness in martial arts is growing (see e.g. Channon 2013 ; Woodward 2014), women’s participation in boxing, especially in mixed training and sparring, continues to be unusual. Boxing is a sport in which men traditionally have been seen as heroes. Based on their research on boxing, Woodward (2007) and Wacquant (2004, 2005) conclude that boxing continues to be a place where practices of masculinity that are characterized by corporal contact, courage, danger, and, sometimes, violence are lionized. Such practices have been labelled as ‘heroic masculinity’. At the same time, the involvement of women in boxing continues to grow. Women’s boxing as an Olympic altered the attractiveness of boxing not only for women but also for trainers with the ambition to produce champions. Although Lindner (2012) concludes that women’s participation in boxing at the Olympics is imbued with contradictions and ambiguities, female competitive boxers seem to have become attractive to and lucrative for boxing clubs. Women have become full-fledged participants in boxing and are competing at national and international levels. This suggests that a change must have occurred in the routines of regulating diversity in boxing gyms that were, and still are, considered bastions of masculinity.

The integration of women into boxing seems to be a process of negotiating meanings given to gender in the sport. Mennesson (2000), studying the social histories and identifications of women entering into this ‘man’s world’, concluded that women occupy a paradoxical position, in that they are both challenging and reinforcing a traditional gender order. Although permitting diversity seems to be part of boxing practices, and is congruent with its egalitarian ethos, the full

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 61 Chapter 3

participation of women in boxing requires new routines and practices to regulate sameness and difference in the gym (see also Paradis 2012). Although scholars have investigated the entry of women into boxing, most have focused on issues such as clothes (e.g. Paradis 2012; Van Ingen and Kovacs 2012) and how women negotiate the sport (e.g. Mennesson 2000; Lafferty and McKay 2004; Woodward 2007, 2008). We, however, take a more institutional approach, focusing on the boxing gym, and applying the concept of governmentality to discover how gendered constructions of sameness and difference are negotiated and how they influence the regulation of diversity.

We assume diversity to be ‘dynamic, situational and a site of contestation’ (Ahonen et al. 2014, 266), and thus specific to a given setting. In our study, we distinguish between setting and context. A ‘setting’ is a situation in which interactions occur at a certain place and time, and in which certain meanings dominate as the result of power being exerted on and by every individual in acts of negotiation. Settings can be understood, thus, as arenas, where meanings given to diversity by all involved are governed, negotiated, and established through technologies of power. ‘Context’ is the larger sociocultural environment that is shaped by discourses that influence thinking and doing in taken-for-granted practices and in specific settings.

The purpose of this study, in the broad sense, is therefore to explore how a focus on regimes of practice and constructions of sameness and difference could serve as an analytical tool for revealing how power is used to govern diversity in organizations. We use the concept of governmentality to focus on how power works in relationships and interactions, and to trace how it regulates diversity in an organization, in this case, the boxing gym. Specifically, we analyse how historically – culturally determined rationalities direct the use of technologies of power at the micro level and the consequences this has for managing diversity.

Boxing and the social organization of the regulation of violence

We mentioned earlier that one form of the regulation of diversity in the gym is the routinized ways of managing a gym. However, the regulation of diversity has an additional specific feature in this context, namely that it also regulates the physical violence that is inherent to boxing. Boxing requires athletes to enact violence upon each other, which necessitates a unique regulation of behaviour. Collins (2008, 9) describes fights as ‘typically stylized and limited [... ], violence is socially organized

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 62 The organization of diversity in a boxing club: governmentality and entangled rationalities

as fair fights, limited to certain kinds of appropriately matched opponents’. Strict regulation of boxing techniques in the gym and during fights in the ring is needed to make this sport safe and socially acceptable. Although sparring is a part of training sessions and allows the boxer to practise skills (Paradis 2012), it is similar to a real fight because of its intensity, boxers’ concentration and eagerness to score, and perhaps also because others in the gym are watching. So, sparring involves prestige in the gym, as fighters are assigned status by both opponent and audience (Collins 2008, 207–208). Sparring also provokes rivalry between boxers and must be regulated carefully to prevent injuries.

Comradeship plays an important part in this regulation. Norms of equality and masculinity shape male relationships inside the gym (De Garis 2000; Wacquant 2005). De Garis (2000, 104) explains that the culture of the gym ‘promotes sparring practices that avoid injuries, treats the “opponent” as a partner, and is often characterized by a shared intimacy’. Both boxers must control and guide their behaviour in a sparring session, maintaining an ultimate goal of learning from each other instead of dominating and hurting each other. Sparring partners must deal with differences in technique level, skill, body weight, and strength. Tensions due to constructed meanings about differences (othering) and conflicts between sparring partners can lead to rivalry and uncontrolled fights. This could be dangerous especially because sparring partners are rarely appropriately matched due to differences in skill level and weight. So, feelings of sameness and partnership evoked by sparring not only stimulate intimacy and allow for strong relationships, but they also minimize differences that could provoke conflict and misuse of fighting techniques. Safe sparring requires respect and dealing with differences in strength and skill. This respect is challenged when men and women in the gym do not consider each other to be equal partners. Notions of heroic masculinity in the gym could be contested when women and men become sparring partners, especially if a female boxer defeats a male boxer in front of other male boxers. Such challenges to definitions of masculinity may complicate the integration or normalization of this relatively new group of boxers in boxing organizations.

BCG in context

BCG, the subject of this case study, is a new, small and growing club with 40 – 50 members, ranging in age from 10 to 40. It is one of six registered gyms in a large city in the Netherlands, located in an area that struggles with drug dealing and related criminal activity. The membership of BCG is made up of women and

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 63 Chapter 3

men from Dutch or mixed ethnic backgrounds, and varies from month to month. Gym membership is usually paid monthly, often by cash, making the exact number of people who regularly box at BCG difficult to determine. This is not an unusual phenomenon in the Netherlands.

Training of adult members is led by three men: a senior trainer (who is also a well- known referee), a head trainer, and a part-time trainer. They all have a long history of boxing in the Netherlands, having boxed in national or international matches as both amateurs and professionals. This history gives them status both in the larger Dutch boxing context and in this particular gym. Typically, both male and female members lead parts of the training session, such as the warm-up or the strength training, under the supervision of a trainer. Mixed sparring is also common.

In order to survive as a business, and gain respect from people outside the gym, BCG must become a full-fledged, successful club, preferably with a few members who are national or even international champions. Five of the eight competitive fighters are male, and are between the ages of 18 and 30. Three of the fighters are female, and on average a little bit older, between the ages of 23 and 30. These women are more successful in their fights than the men (see Dortants and Knoppers 2013 for a more detailed description of BCG). In 2011, one of BCG’s female boxers participated at the 2011 European Cup held in the Netherlands. This is the context in which BCG’s trainers regulate the presence of women in the gym.

Methodology

Analyses of governmentality focus on how rationalities and technologies of power operate in a routinized way in regimes of practices. This paper, focused on governmentality within a boxing organization, focuses on how members and trainers impose on others their version of what boxing is and ought to be. We used observations and interviews to understand how and why constructions of sameness and differences are governed in different micro-level settings through relations of power.

We conducted 30 observations along with many informal conversations before, during, and after training sessions, competitions, and boxing events between 2008 and 2010. We were present in the gym about once a month in order to follow the developments of this gym over time. There, we observed daily practices and interactions – including training, sparring, and one-on-one and small-group

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 64 The organization of diversity in a boxing club: governmentality and entangled rationalities

conversations, between trainers and boxers and amongst boxers. As power is visible in its effects (Clegg, Courpasson, and Philips 2006, 213), we were able to observe manifestations of power (control over time, place, activities, and behaviour) and moments when trainers and boxers tried to influence the thinking and activities of others.

The first author did not participate in training sessions, but observed while sitting on a bench, often with people beside her, or stood beside boxers and trainers while they were talking about daily affairs. This proximity enabled her to ask questions about events as they happened. Her presence in the gym (usually between three and five hours per visit) provided opportunities to see daily practices and struggles in the gym and to talk informally about what boxing is and the impact it has on athletes. She observed how different technologies of power were used by trainers and boxers, and how these informed negotiations over the ‘truth’ of boxing and what was considered ‘normal’ in the gym. She noted how people talked about sameness and difference, and how differences were made relevant or irrelevant during trainings, competitions, and in informal conversations between boxers and trainers and amongst boxers. Particular attention was paid to how they practised gender (Martin 2003, 19). Mental and jotted notes were taken quickly during observations (Emerson, Fretz, and Shaw 1995), and were transcribed while returning home by train.

In addition to many informal interactions, the researchers interviewed the three competitive female boxers and the three competitive male boxers who were frequently in the gym and served as sparring partners for female boxers in preparation for fights. In addition, we conducted three formal interviews with each of the three trainers and two with the sport consultant who was involved in BCG. In the interviews, we focused on how they talk about boxing, what it means to them, how they construct sameness and difference, and how they reason about differences within the boxing setting. We also asked them to explain why they did things they had done. All interviews were recorded and then transcribed verbatim.

In our study, we assume that meanings given to sociocultural/demographic characteristics in boxing are contested, ambiguous, and situational. In analysing the data, we first explored the constructions of sameness and difference that seemed to be relevant for the boxers and trainers we interviewed and observed. We then analysed their reasoning about boxing, the rationalities that underpinned the use of technologies of power in the gym, and the technologies of power that trainers and boxers used in their interactions. We analysed constructions and practices of sameness and differences by trainers and boxers, specifically those related to

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 65 Chapter 3

boxing, gender, and practices of masculinity as they pertained to boxing in general and BCG in particular. In addition, we looked at how constructions of boxers were negotiated, became dominant, and were maintained or contested. Towards the end of our research, the first author discussed our findings with the boxers and trainers in a debriefing session, which provided additional information, especially regarding the ambiguity of gendered practices in boxing.

Two different rationalities inform the governing of difference in BCG

The results reveal that both a sport and a gender rationality are relevant in this gym, and that these together regulate the full participation of female boxers.

Boxing as a competitive discipline: the sport rationality The dominant style of thinking about and practising boxing in BCG is that boxers must be disciplined to become real and successful boxers. The boxers construct themselves as disciplined (elite) athletes who focus on learning, achieving, and reaching set goals, like other athletes. A male boxer explains how this works for him:

According to the core trainer ‘boxers don’t smoke’, so I’m not going to smoke. ‘Boxers don’t drink’, so I don’t drink. You have to be fit; you have to sleep, so you can’t go out on the town, you know, so you live by a certain code.

Observations show that strict and demanding training sessions encourage an eagerness to perform as a boxer. A female boxer explains that she feels comfortable with the culture in the club because everyone there is a fanatic about boxing, and remarks, ‘Otherwise, you don’t do it’. Only ‘real’ boxers stay in this gym; a female boxer defines a ‘real boxer’ as someone who ‘doesn’t complain, doesn’t moan about how hard the training is, but just gets on with it’. Boxers explain that they are ‘in love with the sport’, develop a passion for it, and increasingly live like a boxer. Illustrative of the way sport is constructed at BCG is a comment by a female boxer: ‘Boxing is all or nothing’. Even those who box only recreationally must be in shape, as you ‘need the passion to throw your punches’.

This sport rationality means a boxer’s body is evidence of how disciplined he or she is. A female boxer explains how this works: ‘Naturally, I think of a real boxer as an athlete who is dry [(s)he has no visible fat] and has beautiful, long muscles. They’ve trained hard and they’re disciplined’. Boxers become self-disciplined ‘through a set

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 66 The organization of diversity in a boxing club: governmentality and entangled rationalities

of routine practices and mechanisms’ (Woodward 2008, 541). The boxers at BCG see themselves and other boxers as (self-)disciplined and dedicated athletes whose lives, thoughts, and actions are characterized by their striving to exemplify the ideal image of a boxer. This way of thinking about boxing as a disciplined, high- level, competitive sport constitutes the sport rationality of BCG, creating notions of sameness that bind the boxers of BCG (see also De Garis 2000). It also shapes the use of technologies of power to ‘normalize’ behaviour that enables boxers to become champions.

Trainers use a seemingly gender-neutral sport rationality in thinking about and practising boxing. Trainers explain the irrelevance of gender difference: ‘You come here to box, and here you are simply a boxer’. This is in line with what Wacquant (2004) describes as an egalitarian ethos. BCG trainers also apply this egalitarian ethos in their normalization of gender as irrelevant. It is accepted as common sense in BCG that women and men train together, and that successful boxers, who must prepare for fights, get more attention from trainers, especially during sparring sessions. During observations of sparring sessions, we noticed that trainers do not distinguish between male or female boxers when preparing boxers for fights. One trainer explained that what counts in this preparation is ‘finding appropriate sparring partners before an upcoming fight’, even when this places male fighters in a subordinate role compared to women. This way of reasoning is congruent with the sport rationality characterized by newly constructed meanings of boxing in which both men and women can be ‘real’ boxers.

The trainers also use this sport rationality to explain that boxing is a well-regulated and safe sport. They compare boxing with the less regulated and commercialized sport of kickboxing, asserting that ‘We are civilized, and we are an Olympic sport’. Trainers are sensitive to social norms and have discussions among themselves about the boxers with whom they want to work, and even whom to admit to the gym, especially when there are suspicions about the use of fighting techniques outside the gym and criminality. They want BCG to have a positive image. However, the image of boxing as well regulated and safe makes this sport less attractive to those who seek a sport where they can be seen as heroic. One female boxer compared boxing to kickboxing, saying ‘Kickboxing makes you look tougher among your mates than boxing does, because you’re not such a sissy, but with a punch on – yeah, the public wants to see blood, doesn’t it?’ In this quote, she employs the sport rationality to suggest that kickboxing might be more strongly associated with masculinity than boxing.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 67 Chapter 3

Gender rationality in boxing The ideal of the well-disciplined boxer is congruent with the pugilist culture described by Wacquant (2004). However, our data show that meanings within the pugilist construct, and especially those concerning gender, are diverse, ambiguous, and contested. The cultural norms and routinized practices that are part of boxing’s tradition of erasing socio-demographic categories make it easier for trainers to use a ‘norm of equality’. They do not tolerate a distinction between men and women at BCG because they construct gender as irrelevant. They therefore do not tolerate public differentiations of gender during training. Statements by boxers suggest that they have internalized this definition and consider it normal that women want to box. A male boxer explains: ‘Boxing is also a sport for girls. If you can do it, why shouldn’t you? And girls certainly should be able to manage it. If they’re motivated, they should be able to do so’. Another male boxer articulates the gender-neutral norm associated with becoming a real boxer: ‘It’s the same for boys as well as girls. If a boy comes here expecting to become a professional boxer without doing anything, he won’t get anywhere’. Here, in both statements, the sport rationality is in operation: you can only be a serious athlete if you train. At the same time, a distinction is made, as they explain how women can meet the (traditional male) norms to become real boxers. Such statements reveal how the sport rationality in boxing is saturated with norms about masculinity, and remains so. Nevertheless, the application of this sport rationality, with its implicit norms of masculinity, influences the women in BCG. In interviews, female boxers emphasized that they feel they are taken seriously as athletes, especially because they think they fulfil the image of the disciplined boxer. A female boxer explains:

I’m a woman but I’m not the girlie type, so that, I think, they see me as one of them. I train just as hard, maybe even harder. But I am really disciplined and I don’t complain. I never ask them to go easy on me, I just do everything. I think that’s why I just completely fit in.

Although professing gender neutrality, she emphasizes that she is not the ‘girlie type’ and that a real (female) boxer does not complain (see also Sisjord and Kristiansen 2009). This implies she thinks women are perceived as complainers; her statement suggests constructions of other differences, namely those of ‘tough women’ who do not complain and are dedicated, and of ‘girlie women’ who ask for special treatment. She thinks that only tough women are really fit for boxing and only these women will be accepted into this culture. Toughness seems therefore to be associated with heroic masculinity.

Our study shows that boxers and trainers assign meanings to gender and boxing

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 68 The organization of diversity in a boxing club: governmentality and entangled rationalities

that can be contradictory or ambiguous. This reflects Mennesson’s (2000) finding about the ambiguous meanings women boxers assign to their bodies. Although all the women involved in this study defined themselves as ‘tough’ women, they differed in the importance they assigned to ‘women’s stuff’ such as make-up and feminine clothes. Some emphasized their femininity by wearing tight shirts and shorts during trainings and competitions, while other women preferred to wear the loose-fitting ensembles that the men wore (see also Van Ingen and Kovacs 2012). This ambiguity is notable in how trainers talk about outfits for fights. One trainer explained that he would like women to wear skirts because ‘then you can see that this is a woman’, but he adapts to the women’s preferences by having the competition outfit accommodate their individual wishes. These arrangements are made before or after training in one-on-one conversations or in small-group discussions. The trainers construct this differentiation as ‘coaching the individual’ in which they pay attention to each boxer individually regardless of gender. The women boxers explained in interviews that they felt these choices mean that they are taken seriously as boxers and as individual athletes, in contrast to the authoritarian style and ‘equality’ that prevail during public training sessions.

Complexity of overlapping and interacting rationalities Men and women train and spar together, and define themselves as ‘real’ disciplined boxers in line with the sport rationality that seems to fit both male and female boxers. On the other hand, our observations and interviews also reveal that male and female boxers are constructed as having different physiques, mentalities or levels of dedication, and ways they wish to be trained and coached. For example, female boxers in BCG remark that women are not as strong as men: ‘because we aren’t exactly the same. If it’s a man, he’s much heavier than you [female boxer], you’re just not the same. [... ] Yes, sure, yes, yes, you’re a lot more powerful if you’re a lot heavier’. Dealing in a disciplined manner with differences in strength and training potential is part of the dominant cultural norm in boxing. A male boxer explains how differences in strength are taken into account: ‘Of course you do not go at full strength when sparring with girls, that is why a trainer never places a newcomer in a sparring match with a girl’. Lafferty and McKay (2004) also found evidence of the primary coach’s protective, paternalistic attitude towards women in the gym, indicating that boxing gyms have not become as gender neutral as the sport rationality suggests. The data show too that female boxers themselves manage their sparring sessions with men, especially novices, by explaining to the opponent that he has to adapt his style and strength to hers.

Male boxers help prepare women for fights by sparring with them. Observations found this was generally considered a normal procedure in this gym. Some male

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 69 Chapter 3

boxers, however, needed to be disciplined explicitly into this position as helper of female boxers. A female boxer explains:

Well, mostly I just try to be more cautious [in mixed sparring]. But recently there was a boy, he weighed 80 kilo or so, all muscle – and I saw him becoming more and more aggressive, and I said at a given moment, ‘let’s just relax otherwise we won’t learn anything’. [... ] I saw that he was a bit annoyed. Often they do not see that they hit very hard.

She made clear that she wants to change the mind-set of male sparring partners:

I explained to him that I know he is strong and that I do not necessarily want to be better [than him], but we both have to learn something. I think if you talk about this with them, then they will try to think differently.

Besides constructing and regulating these physical differences, she went on to suggest that women rely less on strength and more on tactics:

It’s a completely different experience [for women]. Yes, perhaps men get involved in boxing because they say ‘I want to fight and I just want to put that bloke on the canvas’. But I think that women play the game differently. There are more ways to play a game.

This is comparable to research that finds women footballers presenting themselves as playing a game based on strategy and technique rather than on physical strength (Mennesson 2000) and constructing alternative discourses about firefighting (Ainsworth, Batty, and Burchielli 2014). This emphasis on skill over strength may therefore be a common strategy for self-presentation or survival used by women in male-dominated activities or occupations that require physical strength.

Besides revealing how bodies and tactics become gendered, the data also reveal how boxers and trainers construct gender differences related to mentality. In an interview, a female boxer explains that there are differences in training men and women:

My mental state fluctuates, as happens with most women. I think a guy, or a male trainer, or anyway just a trainer, would greatly benefit from knowing how women learn and how they view things, umm, how things are received. There’s a difference. They [trainers] say, ‘Yes, but you are all emancipated, and men and women are equal’, but that’s just not so.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 70 The organization of diversity in a boxing club: governmentality and entangled rationalities

She also wants her trainer to be careful when he gives her feedback, because, she says, ‘I take every word he says more seriously than a male boxer does’. In this way, she uses a gender rationality to argue that, to become successful (gender-neutral) boxer, she should be trained and coached differently from men. The trainer was a bit surprised when he heard this during a feedback session after a training, and repeated his assertion that ‘everyone is equal and should be trained like equals’ (field notes 15 June 2010). This example illustrates how trainers work to make the gender- neutral sport rationality dominant at BCG. The different perspectives of the athlete and the trainer about gender reveal how the two rationalities coexist at BCG.

Although trainers use a sport rationality to argue that all boxers are equal, they also assert that women train more seriously, are less involved in criminal activities, and are more disciplined than men (field notes 9 April 2009). The trainers construct these women as easier to train, a difference that means, at least according to trainers, that women develop into real boxers much faster than many men do. This construction of gendered mentalities favours female boxers in this gym where the sport rationality dominates. Women in BCG achieve an equal and even privileged position because they are seen as potential contenders for the Olympic Games. Female boxers experience the BCG as a place where they have the same, and even more possibilities and opportunities than men, especially when preparing for their competitions. Most trainers dream of taking a boxer to the Olympic Games; it represents the highest level of achievement for a trainer. In informal talks with the researchers, trainers asserted that it is easier for female boxers to achieve this level of competitiveness because women’s boxing is a relatively young sport and at the moment there is less competition compared with men’s boxing. This may explain why women at BCG have become important vehicles for trainers to realize personal ambitions to be regarded as successful trainers. Lafferty and McKay (2004) point to similar findings and suggest that ‘outstanding’ women may be granted access to the hard-core boxing clubs primarily to enrich the lives and opportunities of male boxers. This may also be true for the trainers of women.

The combination of the gender rationality and the sport rationality often results in unstable, situational, and ambiguous meanings, though these also present opportunities to influence and negotiate alternatives to the idealized norm for boxers. Trainers and boxers both use technologies, directed by overlapping or conflicting rationalities in gender and boxing. Both strive to fulfil their ambitions in boxing by making their constructions of relevance of constructions of sameness and difference dominant.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 71 Chapter 3

Micro politics: dealing with ambiguous and conflicting rationalities

Although ambiguous, the ideal image of a ‘real’, disciplined (gender-neutral) boxer in BCG seems clear to all those we interviewed. Observations showed that this constructed norm of equality is visible and managed with different technologies of power in daily practices during training sessions in the gym. The behaviour of those who entered the gym for the first time – who might not share these constructed norms – was regulated to be congruent with the dominant sport rationality. Trainers repeatedly urge young people to choose and commit to this idealized image of a boxer. This process of disciplining members to self-discipline begins the moment the newcomers arrive. They are greeted with comments like ‘If you want to be a real boxer, then you have to... ’ and ‘Here in this gym, we... ’. They are presented with a long list of rules by which they have to train and live. These are repeated time and time again, as disciplinary technologies of power that encompass the culture of the gym. By using such disciplinary technologies, trainers try to convince boxers to think and act as real boxers. Such indoctrination, persuasion, and hierarchical control have consequences, including the acceptance of female boxers as full participants. For example, every new male boxer has to accept the presence of women in the gym, even if they do not agree and think that boxing is only for males. Although conflicts concerning mixed sparring are scarce in this gym, they do happen and are told as a story that reinforces the rationality that gender is irrelevant. Violations of this norm during training sessions provoke heated discussions and conclude without negotiation. One male boxer related the following story:

we had a guy here who said, ‘I think it’s ridiculous that you have to train with girls here’. The trainer said to him ‘You know what? If you feel so good about yourself then you don’t belong here’. The boy started a row with a girl and the other trainer said, ‘I don’t want to see you here again’. We simply don’t allow that here. (field notes 21 April 2008)

Woodward (2007, 3) contends that ‘boxing is not just about men; it is about masculinity, although not reserved for men only’. Access for (tough) women into this ‘bastion of masculinity’ means, as mentioned earlier, that they can identify with practices of masculinity associated with a traditional desirable masculine boxer. This identification may be diminished for some men. Male boxers who use a gender rationality of heroic masculinity in boxing sometimes have a difficult time coping with this new truth about boxers. Acker (2009, 213) explains that new norms of gender equality and participation of women in male-identified activities can be

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 72 The organization of diversity in a boxing club: governmentality and entangled rationalities

problematic for some men because ‘increasing equality with devalued groups can be seen and felt as an assault on dignity and masculinity’. Trainers are also affected, since their status is determined by their boxers’ success, and the most successful boxers at BCG are often women. Trainers may experience this situation as uncharted territory, and experience discomfort being defined as a ‘trainer of female boxers’ rather than of men (field notes 15 June 2010). Boxers and trainers who want to practise heroic masculinity do not always feel at home in this club. Making space for women as equals in what was originally conceived as masculine place may result in conflict; the ultimate consequence of such conflict may be that trainers and members leave the gym. Because trainers strive to develop a full-fledged gym of champions, successful boxers create a legacy that is used as a powerful technique in negotiations about what is ‘normal’ in the gym. We saw that those who think differently from the head trainer do not return while like-minded boxers and trainers continue to be involved in the gym for a long time.

Different technologies of power in different settings within the same context Our observations revealed that different technologies of power are used in the context of BCG. Trainers shape and normalize the conduct, thought, decisions, and aspirations of others in order to achieve the objectives they consider desirable (see also Miller and Rose 2008, 32). The disciplinary techniques of command and control dominate the training sessions because discipline is assumed to create uniformity. Once uniformity is achieved, all differences between boxers can purportedly be neutralized with everyone doing the same activity at the same time. Most importantly, these technologies, what they call ‘discipline’, mean everyone, even senior boxers, can be penalized publicly (see also Dortants and Knoppers 2013). In this more public setting, negotiations and conflicts are quite intense to ensure that boxers submit to the required discipline. Trainers use their capacity, authority, and status to make their truth claims about boxing dominant. This truth includes the normality of women’s full participation in boxing. Through this regime of discipline, trainers strive to shape the conduct of boxers, creating an internalized self-discipline in thinking, making decisions, and doing.

The data reveal that this sport rationality shapes the thinking, practising, and governing of trainers and boxers in more informal interactions before and after training sessions. It is at these times that a more differentiated truth about real boxers becomes visible and is permitted in negotiations. In these interactions, all kinds of attributed sociocultural characteristics were allowed to be discussed by trainers and boxers and constructed as relevant. Topics include concerns regarding

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 73 Chapter 3

ethnically associated eating habits (and thus weight), relations to immigrant parents and problematic situations with parents and (boy)friends, (gendered) outfits, or menstruation. For example, one trainer visibly enjoyed helping boxers choose an outfit for a fight, explaining that he wants to please boxers, and that he pays special attention to outfits for one female boxer who dresses well because ‘This is a woman, after all’ (field notes 9 July 2008). In such moments, gender rationalities are allowed, discussed, and negotiated because not all women want to wear feminine outfits. This can result in slight adaptations to allow for individual (gendered) preferences, which run counter to the sport rationality.

Trainers and boxers use additional techniques in these face-to-face interactions than those described above during ‘public’ training sessions. Trainers use subtle persuasion, seductive statements like ‘you can become a champion’, satisfy certain personal preferences, and employ a more friendly way of negotiation and inducement than during training sessions. Boxers reciprocate by using strategies such as regular attendance, commitment to training, and adhering to trainer preferences in negotiations that are available to them to meet their ambitions as a boxer. The trainer explains that he personalizes his strategy for each boxer; the senior trainer says he chooses his words more carefully in coaching one of the female boxers because otherwise ‘she falls silent’ (field notes 23 June 2008). There is more room for the negotiation of individual (gendered) preferences for dedicated and successful boxers. For example, the trainer is very pleased with the disciplined attitude and weight loss of a female boxer, and gives her earrings as a present to show his appreciation for her effort (field notes 8 June 2010). The gendered nature of the present is noteworthy.

Female boxers are also perceived by these trainers to be more dedicated than men. This means the trainer trust female boxers even when they do not follow all the rules and come late to a practice because, as one surmises, ‘she will have a good reason’. Yet, a trainer also complains about a female boxer who, according to him, is less dedicated ‘than other women’ and just ‘complains and whines and does not push herself’ (field notes 7 October 2008). But since she was the first woman to be successful in this club, trainers continue to support her.

Thus, the individual regulation and guidance of boxers occur not only through the public affirmation of equality, or through punishment and rewards in regimes of discipline during training, but also in a subtler manner in informal interactions. Here, meanings about boxing are negotiated between trainers and boxers. Trainers’ guidance through the use of technologies of persuasion is tailored to meet individual needs, but also to discipline and normalize behaviour. In this way, trainers

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 74 The organization of diversity in a boxing club: governmentality and entangled rationalities

try to build a bridge between the individual and the development of a real boxer consistent with the sport rationality.

Discussion and conclusions

In this study, we have demonstrated how different rationalities regarding boxing and gender are manifest and become intertwined in a boxing club. We have shown how two rationalities, partly entangled, give rise to a particular regulation of gender diversity in boxing. By using Dean’s conceptualization of governmentality and the concept of constructions of sameness and difference as a power-sensitive framework, we were able to unravel the regulation of (gender) diversity in this case. We found that two rationalities became relevant to the regulation of gender diversity that is, to the regulation of full participation of women in boxing. The sport rationality was dominant and justified the presence of women in the gym, an attitude that must be adopted by those who want to or will become real boxers. The sport rationality seemingly includes clear and unambiguous constructions of a gender-neutral, idealized ‘real boxer’. This rationality also links the truth about successful, competitive boxers to safety (Collins 2008) and reflects the ambitions of the majority of the boxers and trainers in this gym. The boxers produce and reproduce what is considered normal and abnormal in BCG. At the same time, the gender rationality is used to differentiate between women and men outside of training sessions, allowing every BCG member to construct their own meanings about masculinity and femininity in boxing. This results in an ambiguity of meanings about gender in boxing that are ‘invisible’ during trainings, but relevant in informal interactions.

Both rationalities direct the use of historically – culturally accepted hierarchical, disciplinary techniques during training sessions and the use of negotiating individualized technologies in informal settings. In both settings, constructions create differences regarding femininity and masculinity. During trainings, the suggestion of difference is suppressed by the dominant routines of hierarchy; the authority of trainers is not to be challenged. This hierarchical conduct is perceived and accepted as being in line with the traditions governing boxing. In less public, informal interactions, the same rationalities are negotiated through technologies of power. ‘Resistance’ of such rationalities may mean trainers and boxers discuss and negotiate a more complex and layered construction of an ideal boxer. Where needed, gender can be constructed as a relevant difference to meet individual preferences and gendered subjectivities, especially those pertaining to dominant

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 75 Chapter 3

constructions of femininity and masculinity in this gym.

In summary, these trainers used different technologies of power in different settings to bridge a coercive, unambiguous form of governing diversity with a way of conduct that negotiated meanings assigned to femininity and masculinity. A combination of hierarchy and negotiation technologies can prevent boxers from leaving the gym. However, trainers are alert because too much deviation from the dominant sport rationality to meet gendered preferences may undermine the application of unambiguous rules in formal settings, including those of equality. On the other hand, trainers strive for success by recruiting and keeping boxers in their gym, especially the most talented ones. Losing boxers is always painful, but too many compromises mean the credibility of trainers may be diminished. Regulating diversity in different settings with different technologies of power enables trainers and boxers to deal with these contradictions. This study shows also that trainers or managers can use technologies of power to create a culture where women feel welcome. While the authoritarian approach used by the trainers in this case study may not be feasible for use in many organizations, the unconditional support given to these women may go long way in ensuring that they do not drop out.

We used Dean’s concept of governmentality to show how a norm of equality, described by Wacquant (2004) as an egalitarian ethos, exists in BCG, but not all the time, not in all settings, and not consistently in the rationalities or practices at BCG. Since women are constructed as real boxers, gender has, to a certain extent, become relevant in negotiations about what real boxers are and should do. The traditional sport rationality in boxing was imbued with constructions of masculinity, which explains why gender was originally not an issue because, within the egalitarian ethos, it was obvious that boxing was a sport for men only. The acceptance of women in boxing disrupted this unambiguous way of thinking about boxing as a sport for men, but it has not fully displaced such beliefs (see also Paradis 2012). Our use of Dean’s concept of governmentality gives further insight into this way of thinking about boxing and gender and how it is managed. It shows in more depth how the complexity of how power works in the regulation of gender diversity at the micro level.

Although meanings of gender are still ambiguous in boxing, mixed gyms break with the perhaps automatic association of boxing with men and heroic masculinity (see also Channon 2013). In some mixed gyms, this may be seen as a feminization of boxing. This newly constructed image may not be attractive to some men because it is incongruent with their desired masculine identification. This conclusion cannot be generalized for all boxing organizations, however. There are gyms where routines

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 76 The organization of diversity in a boxing club: governmentality and entangled rationalities

have not been changed to facilitate the full participation of women. Male boxers who refuse to spar with women can still ‘escape’ to gyms were mixed sparring is not the norm. So, each boxing organization can construct a new unique connection between gender and sport rationalities. This reconstruction is a negotiation process in which context- appropriate and accepted technologies of power are used in ways that are congruent with ambitions in line with the sport rationale.

We used these concepts of governmentality and constructions of sameness and difference in a specific case, the study of a boxing organization, where diversity exists and needs to be managed. We contend, however, that this framework also could be applied to the research of non-sport organizations and in other contexts to unravel the use of power in governing diversity in organizations. The use of governmentality as an analytical tool can help to reveal different ways of reasoning, leading to an understanding of the ambiguous and situational meanings given to diversity in organizations. Furthermore, the use of this concept can serve as an analytical tool to enable researchers to differentiate between multi-level relations of power, something that has been lacking in much of the research on organizational diversity (Ahonen et al. 2014). The findings of our study suggest that the governmentality concept as described by Dean (2010) can be used to discern the complexity of strategic power plays in organizations in different settings, how they are used to negotiate constructions of gender, and how the governing of diversity may be unique to each setting.

Funding This research has been carried out in the framework of the research programme Sport: Passion, Practice and Profit 2007 – 2010 financed by the Ministry of Public Health, Welfare and Sport, The Netherlands.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 77 Chapter 3

References

Acker, Joan. 2009. “From Glass Ceiling to Inequality Regimes.” Sociologie du travail 51: 199 – 217. Ahonen, Pasi, Janne Tienari, Susan Merila¨inen, and Alison Pullen. 2014. “Hidden Contexts and Invisible Power Relations: A Foucauldian Reading of Diversity Research.” Human Relations 67 (3): 263 – 286. Anthonissen, Anton, and Marianne Dortants. 2006. Respect voor discipline. Een studie naar identificaties van getalenteerde boksers [Respect for Discipline: A Study of Identities of Talented Boxers]. Amsterdam: Uitgeverij SWP. Ainsworth, Susan, Alex Batty, and Rosaria Burchielli. 2014. “Women Constructing Masculinity in Voluntary Firefighting.” Gender, Work and Organization 21: 37 – 56. Brockling, U., S. Krasmann, and T. Lemke. 2011. Governmentality. Current Issues and Future Challenges. New York: Routledge. Channon, Alex Guy. 2013. “Enter the Discourse: Exploring the Discursive Roots of Inclusivity in Mixed-sex Martial Arts.” Sport in Society 16 (10): 1293 – 1308. Clegg, Stewart R., David Courpasson, and Nelson Philips. 2006. Power and Organizations. London: Sage. Collins, Randall. 2008. Violence. The Micro-sociological Theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Dean, Mitchell. 2010. Governmentality. Power and Rule in Modern Society. 2nd ed. London: Sage. De Garis, Laurence. 2000. “Be a Buddy to Your Buddy: Male Identity, Aggression, and Intimacy in a Boxing Gym.” In Masculinities, Gender Relations, and Sport, edited by Jim McKay, Michael Messner, and Don Sabo, 87 – 107. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Dortants, Marianne, and Annelies Knoppers. 2013. “Regulation of Diversity Through Discipline: Practices of Inclusion and Exclusion in Boxing.” International Review for the Sociology of Sport 48: 535 – 549. Emerson, R. M., R. I. Fretz, and, L. L. Shaw. 1995. Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Gems, Gerald, and Gertrud Pfister. 2014. “Women Boxers: Actresses to Athletes – The Role of Vaudeville in Early Women’s Boxing in the USA.” The International Journal of the History of Sport 31: 1909 – 1924. Ghorashi, Halleh, and Ida Sabelis. 2013. “Juggling Difference and Sameness: Rethinking Strategies for Diversity in Organizations.” Scandinavian Journal of Management 29: 78– 86. Gotsis, George, and Zoe Kortezi. 2015. “Operationalizing Critical Diversity Theories: A Contextual Framework of Implementing New Diversity Practices.” In Critical Studies in Diversity Management Literature, edited by George Gotsis, Zoe Kortezi, 69 – 98. Dordrecht: Springer. Lafferty, Y., and J. McKay. 2004. “Suffragettes in Satin Shorts? Gender and Competitive Boxing.” Qualitative Sociology 27: 249 – 276. Lindner, Katharina. 2012. “Women’s Boxing at the 2012 Olympics: Gender Trouble?” Feminist Media Studies 12 (3): 464 – 467. Martin, P. Y. 2003. ““Said and Done” Versus “Saying and Doing” “Gendering Practices, Practicing Gender at Work”.” Gender and Society 17 (June): 342 – 366. Mennesson, Christine. 2000. “‘Hard’ Women and ‘Soft’ Women. The Social Construction of Identities among Female Boxers.” International Review for the Sociology of Sport 35 (1): 21 – 33. Miller, Peter, and Nikolas Rose. 2008. Governing the Present. Administering Economic, Social and Personal Life. Cambridge: Polity Press. Paradis, Elise. 2012. “Boxers, Briefs or Bras? Bodies, Gender and Change in the Boxing Gym.” Body and Society 18 (2): 82 – 109.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 78 The organization of diversity in a boxing club: governmentality and entangled rationalities

Parker, Martin. 2000. Organizational Culture and Identity. London: Sage. Sisjord, M., and E. Kristiansen. 2009. “Elite Women Wrestlers’ Muscles.” International Review for the Sociology of Sport 44: 231 – 246. Van Ingen, Cathy. 2013. ““Seeing what Frames Our Seeing”: Seeking Histories on Early Black Female Boxers.” Journal of Sport History 40: 93 – 110. Van Ingen, Cathy, and Nicole Kovacs. 2012. “Subverting the Skirt: Female Boxers “Troubling” Uniforms.” Feminist Media Studies 12: 460 – 463. Wacquant, Loïc. 2004. Body and Soul. Notebooks of an Apprentice Boxer. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wacquant, Loïc. 2005. “Carnal Connections: On Embodiment, Apprenticeship, and Membership.” Qualitative Sociology 28: 444 – 473. Woodward, Kath. 2007. Boxing, Masculinity and Identity. The ‘I’ of the Tiger. London: Routledge. Woodward, Kath. 2008. “Hanging Out and Hanging about: Insider/Outsider. Research in the Sport of Boxing.” Ethnography 9: 536 – 560. Woodward, Kath. 2014. “Legacies of 2012: Putting Women’s Boxing into Discourse.” Contemporary Social Science 9: 242 – 252. Zanoni, Patrizia, Maddy Janssens, Yvonne Benschop, and Stella Nkomo. 2010. “Unpacking Diversity, Grasping Inequality: Rethinking Difference Trough Critical Perspectives.” Organization 17 (1): 9 – 29.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 79 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 80 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 81 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 82 4 Challenges in regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

Published as: Dortants, M., Knoppers, A. & Van Bottenburg, M. (2016). Challenges in regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics. 8(3) 473- 490.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 83 Chapter 4

Abstract

We use the concept of governmentality to explore how different historically constituted regimes of practices operate to govern the thinking and practicing of full-contact martial arts and combat sports (FCMACS) in the Netherlands and consequently, to resist regulation. After conducting 43 interviews, observing a meeting and various FCMACS events, and analyzing media and relevant documents, we conclude that the (traditional) boundaries between (commercialised) sports and government are strained since the government bans certain events and yet implements policy goals through community FCMACS. The public order and safety regime has now becomes relevant in addition to the already existing sport and economic regimes of practices. Each regime shapes constructions of problems and solutions differently and applies varying technologies of power that are historically and culturally appropriate to that regime. The terms ‘dialogue of the deaf’ and ‘power vacuum’ illustrate the resulting impasse. The data show that meanings about regulation of FCMACS are expressed, but not unravelled, discussed, or negotiated. The lack of supremacy of one of the regimes and/or the absence of balance in the adjustment of regimes causes a power vacuum. We concluded that the impasse will remain as long as the traditional order of fragmented and hierarchical regulation is not replaced by a new status quo regulating these sports. The use of the concept of governmentality enabled us to untangle regimes of practices and explain this impasse in the regulation of FCMACS.

Keywords

Regulation sports; governmentality; fullcontact martial arts and combat sports; regimes of practices; rationalities; technologies of power

Introduction: the impasse

In recent years, much media attention has been paid to full-contact martial arts and combat sports (FCMACS)1 in the Netherlands. This attention was often triggered by fights or shootings near fight events and by calls for regulation or governmental intervention in various FCMACS. Occasionally, popular mixed martial athletes or kickboxers are invited to talk shows to give their opinion on the issue of regulation of their sports. The following summarises such a show after a violent incident occurred during a combat sport event held in Zijtaart [a village in the Netherlands]

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 84 Challenges in regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

in the fall of 2012.

This incident, and problems related to FCMACS became the focus of a discussion on a late-night TV talk show featuring two prominent male kickboxers and a successful female mixed martial arts (MMA) fighter. The show’s hosts repeatedly suggested that ‘violent incidents are part of martial arts and combat sports’ and pressured the fighters to confirm that premise and to agree that ‘something must be done’ to prevent the occurrence of violent incidents in FCMACS.

The fighters agreed with the host but qualified their responses by commenting that the media’s penchant for reporting on violent incidents and downplaying the positive aspects of the sports served both the public and the sport poorly. In addition, they argued that the FCMACS are particularly successful in the disciplinary effects they have on youth, have produced a successful cohort of Dutch martial arts athletes and have provided entertainment for the general public. However, the talk show hosts stuck to their script about safety concerns and fear of violence and then pushed the issue even further by alleging that criminality was associated with the sports. When the show’s discussion ground to a halt due to the participants’ differing perspectives regarding strict regulation versus the overall benefit of sport, the participants were all frustrated and felt as though they had wasted their time.2

The preceding example illustrates the state of discussion regarding FCMACS in the Netherlands rather well; it is a cacophony of voices with little or no real dialogue. Nor are the problems and heated discussions associated with FCMACS new or confined to the Netherlands. FCMACS require overall regulation because, as Collins (2008) argues, in fights ‘violence is socially organised as fair fights’ (p. 9). Thus, fights usually occur in a specific regulated way and within a social structure that sets boundaries on this violence to ensure the safety of participants.

In 1996, Van Bottenburg and Heilbron were asked by the Minister of Sport to do an extensive research on the history and problems of no holds barred (NHB) events in the Netherlands (see also Berg and Chalip 2013, Brent and Kraska 2013). Publicity about a ‘free fight gala’ in Amsterdam elicited heated discussions about the acceptability of NHB events (Van Bottenburg and Heilbron 2006, p. 261). Van Bottenburg and Heilbron concluded that kickbox organisations had failed to adequately organise and regulate their sports. In their recommendations to the Minister of Sport, Van Bottenburg and Heilbron stressed that the government should change its laissez- faire policy and encourage the FCMACS sector to organise and regulate the sports (1996, pp. 95–113). However, no change in policy occurred. When FCMACS became an issue in public and policy debates, problems were minimised. The national

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 85 Chapter 4

government continued to distance itself from these sports while those involved in these sports continued to organise them as they saw fit.

In 2010, this status quo was challenged when violent incidents occurred during several kickbox events in a few Dutch cities. This time the violence was compounded by accusations that strong ties existed between highly commercialised kickbox organisations and criminal elements rather than the moral debate of 1996 dealing with the acceptability of combat sports (free fight/NHB/MMA). Violent incidents were widely reported by the media and several mayors and members of parliament publicly criticised FCMACS (Kamerman 2011). The mayor of Amsterdam announced a ban of large FCMACS events in his city because of their perceived links to criminal organisations (Vugts 2010b).

Notwithstanding the protests of mayors and members of parliament, national and local governments promoted participation in these sports by subsidising programmes, especially in neighbourhoods populated with youngsters from immigrant backgrounds. The support was based on the assumption that FCMACS programmes contributed to community integration and general health of minority groups and to the overall safety of the neighbourhood (see also Dirks 2012). Parallel to this instrumentalisation of sports and the ongoing successes of Dutch fighters in the K-13, FCMACS, especially kickboxing, became popular among the young urban population (Breedveld et al. 2008, p.83; see also, Elling and Wisse 2010).

As a result of this popularity, the agendas of sport sectors and (local) governments were implicitly intertwined. The attempts to ban mega events in several Dutch cities, such as Amsterdam, Hoorn, Leeuwarden, Rotterdam, ongoing bad publicity and the rapid growth of FCMACS pushed local governments to intervene and to involve FCMACS representatives and organizations in the regulation of their sports (Sportraad Amsterdam 2011). Despite incidental local interventions, many initiatives and good intentions especially by local governments and individuals in the FCMACS sector, nothing happened at the national level (De Graaf 2012; document federation 20124). Nothing seemed to be able to break the deadlock and develop a way of regulating these sports.

The current study analyses the background of the resulting impasse and the specific context as to why the regulation of these FCMACS was questioned. The insights gained in the study contribute to the debate about the desirability of governments shaping and regulating sport. The research question guiding the study is: How can an impasse in the regulation of FCMACS be explained and what insights can such an analysis contribute to ending this deadlock?

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 86 Challenges in regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

Mapping the ﬁeld: stakeholders in regulation of FCMACS in the Netherlands

The FCMACS sector and governmental organisations comprise the two main groups of stakeholders involved in this issue (see Figure 1). The FCMACS sector in the Netherlands consists of many national and international federations. Each martial art form and combat sport seems to have its own federation although no one knows the exact number. FCMACS training most often takes place in the numerous small gymnasiums found throughout the Netherlands. Led by a trainer, fighters of both sexes, all ages and social classes train/work at their own level and mostly for their own benefit as only a few of them go into the ring. In addition to preparing a training regimen for fighters, trainers also often act as manager, promoter and/or manager of a (international) FCMACS federation; consequently roles and responsibilities are easily blurred. The local gymnasiums or sport halls are busy places as trainers organise and host both small and large scale events for prize fights every weekend. The affiliated sport federation provides the required jury, doctor and referees, while a promoter takes care of the logistics and financial aspects of the event. In addition to organising large national events, Dutch promoters also arrange international commercial mega events with light-shows and related glitz.

The NOC*NSF is the national umbrella organisation of and for Dutch sport federations. NOC*NSF allows just one member organisation to represent a sport5 and sees the FCMACS as one sport with many disciplines. Despite this policy, seven FCMACS federations6 are member of NOC*NSF and represent a specific (group of) disciplines of FCMACS. Only one recognised federation, the Federation of Eastern Martial Arts (FOG), is involved in discussions on problems in FCMACS like mentioned in the late-night show. FOG was organised in 1982 and is by NOC*NSF seen as the representative of a group of FCMACS that are popular and contested too. It consists of (about) 16 national FCMACS associations7 each with its specific style or tradition in FCMACS, and each with one or more member organisations8. This ‘legitimate’ federation represents just a limited part of all existing FCMACS federations and practitioners in the Netherlands however and many of those participating in the various FCMACS do not recognise its authority in discussions about regulation of FCMACS. The FCMACS sector therefore does not speak with one voice.

The second group of stakeholders are government organisations such as the national (Ministry of Sport and Ministry of Justice) and local governments that act as hosts of fighting events and subsidisers of youth sport programmes. In recent years, police and research institutions that focus on criminal activity have begun

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 87 Chapter 4

to pay more attention to FCMACS because of suspicions that fighters, trainers and promoters are involved in criminal activities.

Government Full contact Martial Arts sector

(social) media

National Government Fighters Trainers Promotors Managers Local Governments NOC* NSF Referees/jury sponsors Doctors Police and criminal Education centers for trainers research institutes Federations, Associations

Figure 1. Stakeholders in regulation of martial arts and combat sports in the Netherlands.

The Netherlands does not have a nationwide sports law or policy that regulates sport. Instead, the national government requires the sport sector to be self-governing and self-regulating (Chaker 2004). The scope of the self-regulations includes rules for practice, rules for sport organisation and controlling play and rules during training and competitions. The role of the government consists primarily of the coordination of and encouragement of elite sport and sport for all (Waardenburg & Van Bottenburg, 2013). Dutch FCMACS lack such coordination and a clear social structure with agreed and enforced rules at all levels.

This specific problem of regulating FCMACS is not unique to the Netherlands. Other European countries like Belgium (Flanders), France and Italy also search for appropriate ways to regulate these sports. Despite differences in history, in degree of commercialisation and in the organisation of FCMACS, the common problems associated with having many different federations, fighting styles and long-lasting conflicts (Vertonghen & Dortants, 2014) make it difficult to regulate these sports at the national level.

Governmentality in sports

Foucault’s (2007) concept of governmentality as further developed by Dean (2010) forms the central theoretical framework for this study. Dean assumed ‘studies of governmentality are more concerned with how thought operates within our organised ways of doing things, our regimes of practices, and with its ambitions and effects’ (p. 27). His concept of multiple regimes of practices provided an analytical

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 88 Challenges in regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

framework that enabled us to untangle different ways of thinking and talking about FCMACS and the multiple and heterogeneous ways of governing of these sports.

A regime of practices is an institutional practice, that is, a routine and ritual way in which people do things in certain places and at certain times. Such an analysis prioritises ‘how’ questions and begins by identifying problems that are situated in ‘particular regimes of practices of government, with particular techniques, language, grids of analysis and evaluation, forms of knowledge and expertise’ (Dean 2010, p. 38). A regime of practices can be analysed by exploring by what means, mechanisms, procedures, instruments, tactics, techniques, technologies and vocabularies authority is constituted and rule is accomplished. This analysis includes questioning forms of thought, knowledge, expertise, strategies, means of calculation, or rationalities that are employed in practices of government (Dean 2010, pp. 41–44). We explored how each regime of practices has been historically and culturally constituted and normalised through the use of technologies and rationalities. We also examined intentions and ambitions related to preferred interventions in self- governance and that of others in these sports. We wanted to know how (a mix of) regimes of practices operate, how people govern and are governed, and the conditions under which regimes of practices emerge, continue to operate and are transformed (Dean 2010, p. 33).

The concept of governmentality is not new to scholarship in sport. Green and Houlihan (2006) used it to analyse the role of the state and government in their relationship to national sport organisations. They argued that the concept of governmentality draws attention to ‘the kinds of knowledge and power through which social activity is regulated and through which actors – citizens, workers, institutions – are constituted as self-disciplining subjects’ (p. 48). Our use of Dean’s approach to governmentality enabled us to analyse how a mixture of regimes of practices operated and what the consequences of changes in that mix were for the regulation of FCMACS.

Research in FCMACS

Only a few scholars have focused on the organisation and regulation of FCMACS. Collinet and Delalandre (2013) described how the search for regulation of MMA in France resulted in the creation of a new federation for MMA by the national government. This was possible because France has laws about the regulation of sport enabling the French government to apply an interventionist sports legislation

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 89 Chapter 4

model ‘that contains specific legislation on the structure and mandate of a significant part of the national sports movement’ (Chaker 2004, p. 9). Vertonghen et al. (2014) described the difficulties in regulating these sports in Flanders.

Berg and Chalip (2013) analysed how a ban of MMA in three states in the USA was transformed into an installation of state athletic commissions to regulate these sports. They concluded that the most influential discourse was an economic one since it eventually framed the policy debate, broke the impasse and made legislation regulating the sports possible. Subsequently, Brent and Kraska (2013) used a sociological perspective to evaluate this regulation of MMA. They concluded that, in addition to creating regulated and legalised events, regulation led to a new illicit scene of unregulated fighting events. This finding suggests that even though the economic discourse was the factor that led to the regulation of FCMACS in most states, the same economic discourse interacted with other discourses about sport such as those about sport being a site for gendered practices and for enabling catharsis facilitated the organisation of these sports in other, less regulated scenes (Brent and Kraska 2013).

The work of Berg and Chalip (2013) provided insight into how stakeholders worked to make the economic discourse as the ruling discourse in bringing about change while muting other discourses like those about violence and safety. We applied a more refined/detailed theoretical framework than used by Berg and Chalip (2013) to understand the resulting impasse and lack of change in the Netherlands. With the resulting insights we contribute to the debate about changes in the regulation of sports and to discussions of issues of regulation dealing with multiple and competing regimes of practices in sports. The process of the regulation of FCMACS in the Netherlands could serve as a case study to demonstrate the added value of the use of governmentality studies for sport.

Methodology

In this study, we paid attention to specific situations in which the activity of governing is problematised (McKee 2009). We became aware of and involved in this problem when the Amsterdam city council asked us to conduct research that would help them in their efforts to regulate FCMACS. The local government negotiated access to a diversity of respondents and to documents. We were intrigued by the issues we encountered and continued to focus on this problem of regulation by subsequently expanding our focus to include more respondents at the local and national levels,

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 90 Challenges in regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

to use media and websites as important resources of information and to select Dean’s work on governmentality as the frame for situating the study. We used an interpretative research methodology that focuses on how individuals interpret their social world (Robson 2011, p. 24). This required us to use an interactive approach to our research design (Maxwell 2005, p. 3).

This research began in 2012 with an analysis of documents and websites, an inventory of groups of relevant stakeholders, the first series of interviews with people of each group of stakeholders, observations of events and meetings and a literature review on regulating of FCMACS. An analysis of the first round of data collection revealed different ways of reasoning about problems and solutions in ways of (prevailed) governing in FCMACS. The second series of interviews, observations and document and web analyses therefore focussed on other ways of reasoning and governing. We conducted 43 interviews in 2012 with a variety of respondents from the FCMACS sector (trainers, promoters, managers, a referee and fighters), from the umbrella organisation NOC*NSF, local and national government (civil servants, a mayor and one council member), Sport Council of Amsterdam, police and advisors working in the area of justice, in pedagogy and in the regulation of FCMACS. We used the snowball method to select respondents from each group of stakeholders. We asked respondents to give names of key figures in the struggle for the regulation of FCMACS. The interviews lasted between 30 minutes and 2 ½ hours and were recorded.

The interviews combined structure by using a topic list and flexibility by enabling the respondent to raise issues (Yeo et al. 2014). Interviewees were asked to talk about their history with FCMACS and to reflect on meanings they gave to their relationship with the sports. In addition, they were invited to comment on any problems they felt were associated with the regulation of these sports. When they named problems, we asked them to explain the background and to provide possible solutions. In order to gain their perspective on how FCMACS in the Netherlands worked, we also asked them to explain how they experienced the field of stakeholders operating in the Netherlands. To further gain insight into what stakeholders considered to be important, we attended three combat sport events to gain insight into proceedings of FCMACS events, a national training, the opening of a gym by a mayor and a meeting of local civil servants and police with representatives of a new international commercial kickbox organisation that wanted to organise mega events in the Netherlands again. Field notes consisted of descriptions of settings, practices and statements during each of these events.

To complement the interviews and observations, we analysed documents obtained

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 91 Chapter 4

from the police, local governments, a local Sport Council, a regional criminal research institute (RIEC) and the existing sport federations in 2012. We also followed news reports covering FCMACS in national newspapers, Dutch national TV, on FCMACS forums (Mixfight.nl; Round1network.nl) and websites of federations, K-1 and Glory World Series on the Internet in 2012. In each case, we analysed the different ways of reasoning in talking and writing about governing FCMACS.

The data were analysed using NVivo. A first reading of the data revealed that the respondents used eight ways of reasoning about FCMACS (Dortants and Van Bottenburg 2013). We further analysed the data of the second series of interviews using topics derived from Dean’s concept of governmentality: history and culture, intentionality (which objectives and goals are sought), construction of problems and the impasse in regulation of FCMACS and technologies of power. We discovered three regimes of practices dominated the discussion of FCMACS.

These three regimes are described below. The results are illustrated with descriptive quotes taken from interviews, media and field notes. Many respondents have various functions and roles. We indicate this with the sign ‘/’.

Three regimes of practices

The results indicate three relevant regimes of practices operating in the issue, namely sport, economics and public order and safety. An explanation of the operation and logic involved in each regime follows.

Sport regime of practices What we identified as a sport regime of practices represents a way of reasoning (sport logic) that reflects and directs practices of governing and organising FCMACS.

History, culture and intentions Beginning in the 1970s, kickboxing quickly became popular in the Netherlands. However, its popularity was not without controversy. Gymnasiums were made available by sponsors to trainers and fighters allowing them to work at the sport full time only to have these same gyms and their associated federations disintegrate or break apart due to differences about styles, fighters and money. A trainer/manager involved since 1970 described the culture of FCMACS as ‘little kingdoms [trainers within the FCMACS] with egos, each working with a small group of students, who [each kingdom] all want to be the boss.’

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 92 Challenges in regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

Overall, the goal of those involved in each sector was to train young fighters to be champions. If successful both fighters and trainers improved their chances at earning status, fame and fortune while the sport gained acceptance as a mainstream athletic pursuit. A trainer explained, ‘the main goal, of course, is the acceptance of our sport and kickboxing becoming mainstream so that when you say to your dad, “I’m going to kickboxing” your father says, “yes, of course” and not “What? Kickboxing?!”.’

Membership in the NOC*NSF was for many FCMACS the main key for FCMACS to obtain the desired recognition as a regular ‘sport’. This recognition was assumed to validate the federation as a ‘decent’ organisation and also, according to a trainer, ‘membership enables us to go to municipalities to discuss programmes and events’. All FCMACS federations strove to become that one legitimate member of NOC*NSF and the effort to become that federation generated a quite a bit of ill-will among the competing federations. Many stakeholders (trainers, promoters, managers and representatives of government and NOC*NSF) described the federation that currently holds this membership status as powerless and questionable. A trainer/ promoter, commenting on the ensuing competing politics of the federations, stated that ’I’m not talking about those ‘weirdos’ of that federation. If they had done their job well, we would have had one federation 35 years ago already.’ In an attempt to clarify the actions of the recognised federation, an employee of NOC*NSF said that the [federation] also has a history; there are a number of federations that were expelled from that recognised federation for various vague reasons, and it does mean that there are parties that say: ‘yes, great fun, but I’m not going to cooperate with the [federation].’

Trainers, fighters, managers of federations and some administrators have a clear vision about what constitutes FCMACS. Training, intelligence, dedication and aptitude are foundational to and interwoven with FCMACS and, as in any other athletic pursuit, it is only those who excel at all these things who become real champions. And the Netherlands has its own heroes – at least for insiders. Since 1993, Dutch kickboxers have won 15 out of 19 K-1 championships and are role models for other kickboxers. Still others saw FCMACS as extraordinary sports because of the foundational character building traits inherent within each FCMACS. A trainer for example, explained that ‘in FCMACS you learn discipline; you learn to keep your emotions under control’. FCMACS teachers are assumed to teach discipline in addition to leading a very demanding and thorough body workout; showing respect is part of the FCMACS culture and is seen as a positive social value. Trainers and fighters explained that, ‘we are educated in FCMACS so it is so natural to say “Oesh” which means, “yes, you are right and I respect you”’ (also fieldnotes 24 June

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 93 Chapter 4

2012). Indeed, according to the interviewees the atmosphere of respect is evident in all aspects of the sports as ‘it is impossible to badmouth the referee – no one would do that; there is discipline inside and outside the ring’. Many of the people working for governmental organisations agreed and recommended FCMACS as being highly suitable for youngsters with issues because teachers discipline young people and teach them respect through the use of these traditional norms.

Construction of the problem According to most stakeholders, the main problem in FCMACS was the fragmented structure of the organisation of these sports. None of the national FCMACS federations, including the recognised FOG, was able to organise an overall registration, education and competition at the national level like in other sports. A trainer/promoter pointed to the individualistic nature of the current federations that focused only on the development of their own fighters; ‘you need small fighting events where beginning fighters can have their first bouts’. Unfortunately none of the federations created overall structures to address the basic needs of the organisation and/or to promote the regulation of safe and fair sports.

Taking a sport rationale position, fighters and trainers also expressed their disappointment that money earned through FCMACS was not reinvested into these sports. The rumour that the sports had a problem with ‘slick guys who are in it just for money and not for the sport or the athletes’ was a common complaint aired among concerned trainers and civil servants. Trainers/managers of federations contended that commercial promoters, who organised most of the matches, cooperated with the federation that was the cheapest and had the fewest restrictions. This enabled promoters to move from one federation to another and resulted in competition among federations for the organisation of fight events. Each federation then has its own rules and fighting passport, and resulted in fighters competing in several federations. According to an experienced trainer, health and safety issues, such as those associated with a technical knockout (TKO) were very likely. ‘It doesn’t work if you have ten federations and they do not keep each other informed of who has fought or has had a TKO,’ he said. With no federation record, a fighter’s health and safety could be in serious jeopardy even when a mandatory rest has been imposed by a doctor after a TKO because he could fight voluntarily or be expected to fight every weekend. It would also often be difficult to determine how many parties a fighter has fought in each discipline. Some trainers/promoters/ managers of federations were also disappointed that, with no clearly defined, approved and regulated federation, no official Dutch champion could be established and publicised in the sport. Rather, federations simply argue among themselves saying ‘my fighter is the Dutch champion because I’m the biggest federation’ clearly not

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 94 Challenges in regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

meeting the standard for a legitimate championship.

Overall, a regulatory framework that contained the structure needed to make using violence against others a safe sport was missing. Strangely, we found little evidence of a desire among the vested interests to unite. This lack of desirability therefore enabled the present state of fragmentation to continue.

Technologies of power The institutionalised power routines in FCMACS are expressed in vertical forms of conduct, meaning that, in a gym ‘there’s a complete hierarchical structure’. The overall structure of FCMACS is based on the principle that the teacher or sensei is the boss and students do what the teacher or sensei demands. According to fighters, trainers, civil servants and to several colleagues, this style of governing must predominate in the regulation of FCMACS because there can only be one boss, including at the national level. All those involved in the sport are familiar with, and accept the structure and even suggest that it is ‘an ideal way of working.’ However, although these hierarchical techniques worked in gyms and within each federation, they were not effective in the governing of the plurality of national federations. Each leading figure in these sports had clear ideas of how these sports needed to be organised and they were all willing to contribute to those ideas. While the sector did not lack intelligent and passionate individuals in leadership roles, those individuals could not look beyond their own interests to develop a national compromise that reflected a plurality of interests. A trainer/promoter summarised the dilemma: ‘the people involved are often macho, men with an ego, testosterone, and, let me say, the making of compromises is more difficult to achieve than in other sports’.

In an effort to undermine the authority of some trainers/promoters and to prevent others from being seen as THE leader and representative of their sport at the national level, certain trainers, promoters and managers of federations used techniques such as blaming and shaming of others to discredit their rivals through interviews in the media and the use of social media. The most common blaming and shaming techniques used consisted of accusations that the rival trainer, promoter or manager was a substandard professional and was involved in criminal activities. Most accusers were quite open about their intent since they would begin these statements with phrases such as ‘I will not mention any names, but...’ One interviewee even asked that the recorder be switched off so he could explain the involvement of others in criminal activities. Another technique used to gain power was used by FOG: it excluded other federations from its membership. Other FCMACS federations can now only gain indirect admittance to NOC*NSF if they are accepted by and into this federation. Its managers function as gatekeepers granting

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 95 Chapter 4

membership to favourite groups. Although there was one NOC*NSF recognised federation, all other federations attempted to become the single representative of the sport and the sole spokesperson that negotiates agreements with mayors and the national government (document federation 20129). Of course producing champions in the sport was helpful, but that was not the major way to become the only primary, trusted and respected federation.

Using a sport rationale the national government expressed its preference to remain at a distance from regulating FCMACS. According to a national civil servant, the government position regarding regulation was that ‘sport regulates itself with its own rules and the government only intervenes when a sport goes out of control.’ The national government used its power to determine that institutional settings of sports and government should be kept separate, as long as this does not create social, legal and/or political problem for the Minister of Sport. A national civil servant explains ‘Regulation at national level was not an option as it was not only a time for deregulation [in society], but also because the government allocated the problem to the responsible local government’ (email, 31 July 2012). Similarly, the umbrella organisation NOC*NSF did not consider the problems of regulating these sports as their problem because they are an organisation of members and most FCMACS federations are not members of NOC*NSF. An official argued that ‘this goes beyond the way we structure our membership, and we cannot take responsibility.’

Constructions of the impasse The deadlock was constructed as reflecting the inherent nature of these sports. An employee of NOC*NSF argued that ‘fighters are used to taking a fighting position, saying “come on” and then “attack”. That’s not the most constructive basis for cooperation.’ Every federation involved in this sector has a history filled with conflicts; they have little experience in working together. Furthermore, all strive for their own success and to dominate the field. According to a NOC*NSF employee, attempts to construct one umbrella federation for martial arts and combat sports, especially for all the administrative work, failed because ‘it was all about people, positions and autonomy of the federations. Whenever a possible solution emerged, the discussion centred on which position was taken on this issue, and who would become the director of such an organisation?’

NOC*NSF also had an interest in maintaining the impasse however; they were afraid of approving federations as ‘legitimate’ that could cause image problems and would be repugnant to important sponsors. So the impasse remained due to a lack of accepted leadership and cooperation, but also because the national government and NOC*NSF had little interest in regulating these sports.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 96 Challenges in regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

The economic regime of practices

History, culture and intentions The use of the economic rationale in FCMACS is less explicit than the sport rationale. A trainer, involved with kickboxing since its inception, explained that traditionally, FCMACS were not about making money. They became almost completely commercialised however when karate and tae kwon do started to grow. ‘Trainers thought, “let’s organise it properly so we can earn some money”. The whole belt system you have in judo and karate is commercialism.’ Many of those involved in FCMACS seemed to be competitors in search of a living. A trainer/promoter summed up what many respondents concluded ‘It is all about money. You have great promoters, small promoters; everyone fights for his own business and wants to earn his own money’. Trainers and promoters used this economic rationality to argue that money has to be found to pay trainers, fighters, doctors, referees, transportation, equipment and so on. They need popular fighters and well- matched fights to turn events into exciting shows. The spectacular and showy fighters are more popular than the robust and decent fighters (field notes 30 June 2012, comments on Mixfight.nl and Round1network.nl in 2012). A trainer/promoter argued that to ‘offer value for money’ is important to attract the audience. We observed that money is also invested to create attractive and spectacular events with light shows, music, stages, popular ring announcers and attractive young women who dance and announce the next round (field notes 30 June 2012 and 02 August 2012).

Kickbox events in the Netherlands are a risky business that needs sponsoring according to the trainers/ promoters we interviewed. ‘Without those hash shops we would have had no events, because without the revenue from them such shows are not affordable’ they explained. Trainers and promoters argued that the drive for earning money was stronger than ensuring a respectable reputation of their sports. Adhering to very strict rules was not always profitable because the FCMACS scene functioned like a free market without rules and control. A trainer/promoter explained that ‘as soon as money is involved it becomes difficult to give priority to common interests. As federation you are dependent on promoters; it’s a very free market.’

Representatives of the new international commercial kickbox organisation used the economic rationale during a meeting about sport and safety with civil servants and police in a large Dutch city. They emphasised that the market of kickboxing is growing by 5% per year, that in part because of successes of its fighters, the Netherlands is a natural market for mega events, and a return of mega events to Dutch cities would be lucrative for both the cities and the sport (Field notes 18 June 2012).

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 97 Chapter 4

Construction of the problem The economic rationale was used extensively by our respondents who argued that cooperation among FCMACS is difficult because trainers, federations and promoters are all competitors who try to earn a living from their sport. According to a NOC*NSF employee

A lot of people in martial arts and combat sports have different roles simultaneously – owners of dojos gyms etc. All depend on earnings in these sports. This creates a different dynamic of how people act and that’s very different than, say, a sports club or a football club. This multirole combination within an unregulated market makes these sports difficult to regulate.

The promoters think organising FCMACS events has become a risky venture, especially since mayors have become more critical about licensing them.

In Rotterdam they had to cancel the event. He [promoter] had invested much money but he [promoter] had to cancel everything, because he did not get a license. And now no one dares to begin to organise an event anymore...

Promoters may have to take many risks when they organise an event, but according to a trainer, promoters have also become too influential: ‘And now we have an undesirable situation that promoters are more important than federations because the federation is totally dependent on the promoters and they know it.’ Trainers also use the economic rationale when they talk about the importance of having good fighters because good fighters attract other good fighters, which is lucrative. ‘You have clubs where you have really good fighters. Those trainers also get extra money for fights of their fighters’. It is a loss for trainers when successful fighters go to another gym because a ‘trainer’s income is reduced when a successful fighter leaves’ explains an ex-fighter/member of Sport Council.

Trainers did not see money as a problem in these sports. ‘I think that it is good that top athletes earn quite a lot of money,’ a trainer/civil servant explained. ‘But it is a problem when some clever commercial men make good money and then forget that it is about sport.’ This suggests the ideal trainer/promoter knows exactly how to balance the values of economics and sports.

Technologies of power With few if any rules and little regulatory control, free market forces have become technologies of power in this economic regime of practices. This means the only way for promoters to organise an event is to create and attract good fighters and

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 98 Challenges in regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

to offer spectacular, thrilling events. Promoters tend to prefer federations that are not too strict in following normative and general safety rules. For example, money can be saved when promotors engage in scheduling many fights during an event, including those for children. This was done to attract more public and generate more revenue through admission fees. Furthermore, promoters create VIP tables that are financially very lucrative. They tend not to require medical blood tests, drug tests or mandatory checks of medical records of fighters that might prevent them from fighting after a knockout. They do not reveal transparency about finances, funding and sponsors and save money on security and on the absence of certified medical doctors. A referee states

Big federations do not always use a doctor, perhaps for financial reasons. When I come to the gala, I ask, ‘where is the doctor?’ and they say ‘no, [I don’t have a doctor] but I have a first aid [certificate]’ I am against it. I tell them you’re playing with lives.

Managers of federations consider these more lucrative events as less safe and less ‘honest’, due to the lack of regulation of (the market of) these sports.

The civil servant of the ministry of sport used an economic rationale to argue that the laissez-faire strategy of the national government is appropriate saying that ‘the galas we are dealing with are commercial events. The municipality can give a license for this event or not’ (email, 31 August 2012). It seems attractive to frame fight events as non-sport activities. Since the national government wants to achieve policy goals through sport organisations, a strategic way to cope with regulations and subsidies of the government is a technology of power related to the economic rationale. Those who succeed in generating these funds award licences and often have a financial advantage (Sportraad, 2011; document local government10).

Constructions of the impasse Respondents who use an economic rationale suggest the impasse is due to a lack of enforcement of regulations that should govern the market. There are no market rules that pay attention to basic measures that contribute to safety and integrity. A trainer/promoter argues that ‘rules that require all to comply are missing’. Trainers/ promoters/managers explain that there is no pressure on them from any regulatory institution to make the gym or events safer and fairer. Consequently, no one can afford to be strict because ‘we will lose income while others profit ’.

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 99 Chapter 4

Public order and safety regime of practices

History, culture and intentions Trainers, promoters, fighters, police and governments reasoning from a public order and safety rationale, consider FCMACS as activities and organisations linked to criminality with ‘some bad apples’ directly or indirectly involved in criminal activities like the laundering of money, violence, blackmail and liquidations. An active trainer described his trainer as follows

Anyway, all these boys are not innocent. My trainer, he is deceased, but he was one of them too. I didn’t care because he was my coach, he was my mentor in kickboxing and he taught me everything. So even when he went to jail again, I followed him....

Trainers/promoters contend that they like others chose the easiest way to find money for their organisation and events by accepting sponsors who were active in the grey/black economy such as hash and sex shops. Fighters also earned extra money by working as security officers in those kinds of companies.

With this history in mind, trainers/promoters want FCMACS to be free in the future from criminal links and safe for fighters and audiences. ‘We become mainstream only if the image of FCMACS changes into an image where you go with your whole family to an event on Saturday afternoon.’

Construction of the problem A public order and safety perspective sees FCMACS as activities and organisations that have two serious problems: relationships with criminal organisations and a seeming lack of concern for the safety of fighters and their public. Eradicating criminality from FCMACS is difficult according to our respondents. Trainers tested the boundaries of the law to gain fighting opportunities for their fighters and were not critical of who sponsored them even if they had a criminal record. A trainer/ promoter confessed that

As a fighter, I didn’t care about who financed the events, I only cared about being able to fight. This has given our sports a bad reputation, but uhm uhm...Sony or Philips or whatever or Unilever will not sponsor our events...

Trainers and promoters admitted that too many people with criminal backgrounds were involved in FCMACS, but attributed this to a lack of trustworthy sponsors and little government intervention. The media reported (Vugts 2010a) and a trainer/

100

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 100 Challenges in regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

promoter acknowledged that ‘behind some events, there is a man who is in prison; this creates a negative image. But on the other hand, the government gives them the possibility to organise these events’. Others think that the accusations of criminality are exaggerated ‘those rumours you hear constantly, may be right, but there is no proof money is being laundered.’

Politicians and other stakeholders use this rationale to call attention to the safety problems for the public and fighters with the use of national media (see for example Vugts 2010b, Binnenlands Bestuur 2011). They claimed that these sports are a threat to society because people learn fighting techniques that could be used outside the ring. National newspapers used this rationale in their reporting of incidents during events in Hoorn, Veghel and Zijtaart (Noordhollands Dagblad 2011, Schildkamp 2012). Fighters use these techniques when intimidating and committing crimes (Smilde 2012). Trainers, promoters and fighters blamed journalists for biased reporting because only criminal action and violence related to FCMACS are covered. They also blamed the government for not interfering. A trainer/promoter summarised the safety and public order position by declaring that ‘if the government regulated our sports a little bit more, then it would have had a completely different image’. The Netherlands is not unique in this use of this rationale. Berg and Chalip (2013) found similar use of the public order and safety rationale in their study of regulation of MMA.

Trainers and managers also use the public order and safety rationale to construct the safety of fighters as a problem, especially fights involving children; currently there are no rules about the age of participants. Some doctors, child safety organisations (mailings from CPSU11 and Stichting Dimitri) and trainers/promoters stress that it is proven that FCMACS cause brain damage and therefore fights between children should be banned. Currently these sports do not have rules requiring the registration of all fighters in a national registry, the presence of a doctor, the administration of medical tests, or a follow up after a TKO. Due to the lack of regulations fighters can fight every weekend, even if they were knocked down in a previous fight, something that is clearly risky. A trainer described the FCMACS sector as ‘loose grains of sand’ that together are unable to create a safe athletic environment and image: ‘If you intend to work for the regulations that facilitate the safety of fighters, they [fighters] go to another federation where they are not stopped from fighting. So that [initiative] was doomed to fail.’

Despite the discussions about criminality and lack of safety, the Dutch national government has adhered to its policy that sports must regulate themselves, a position that is consistent with its policies towards sports in general. According

101

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 101 Chapter 4

to a civil servant, there are no real problems as sport and government each have their own system of (disciplinary) law and local governments have the authority to tackle excesses that occur during events in their cities. The sport sector has also always been very ambivalent about government intervention. The call for government intervention is therefore two sided; overall, both government and sports organisations would prefer the status quo continue; however, the loud voices calling for government action to address problems remain. Most local governments followed a laissez-faire strategy similar to that of the national government until problems with fight events occurred. Local mayors met in 2012 (document local government 201212) to discuss the problems and realised they needed to apply stricter, local legislation to curb incidents and criminal activities in their cities. The laissez-faire policy of sport self-regulation was therefore partially abandoned at the local level. Consequently, this rationale directed a different use of technologies by local and by national government.

Technologies of power The public order and safety rationale relies on the use of technologies of power such as the law, regulations, licensing, record checks (police), investigations and grant and subsidy requirements. Technologies of power, based on the law, are used and proposed especially at the local level. Members of the police described the investigations they conducted in past years to analyse the involvement of FCMACS organisations in criminal activities but found no such evidence. A RIEC conducted an exploratory investigation in these sports and concluded that further research was needed (RIEC 2012). At the local level, authorities applied existing legislation or extended the application of local laws that allowed the local government to conduct background checks into the criminal affiliations of those who organise martial arts and combat sport events (VNG 2012). Promoters then avoided these cities by going abroad or holding events in cities with fewer rules (Verseput 2012). This practice is called the waterbed effect. In an effort to reduce water bedding, some mayors and city managers have used their connections with like-minded politicians at the national level to make this a national issue.

Similar to the sport regime of practices, technologies of power, such as blaming and shaming trainers, fighters and promoters of criminal involvement and unsafe sport practices are also used in the public order and safety regime of practices. The local and national governments involved FCMACS clubs in their sport participation programmes; in so doing they underlined the importance of the public order and safety rationale for organising not only events, but also in the sports themselves. Now the local government demands that certain (safety) standards be met before it allocates grants. This technology of power means that only FCMACS organisations

102

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 102 Challenges in regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

with a special ‘fight right’ quality label can apply for local government support and subsidies.

Constructions of the impasse Trainers and promoters, using the public order and safety rationale, criticised the local governments’ ad hoc rules and interventions saying ‘the national government should come up with rules – we want clarity!’ According to the critics, this lack of clarity and coherence will continue, as will an impasse, if the national government does not take binding measures; ‘the Dutch government has to intervene... we’ve tried for more than 40 years to arrange things and we didn’t succeed.’ Local government and FCMACS sector representatives also attributed the impasse in regulation of FCMACS to the absence of a national policy that clearly describes the rules, rights and obligations for all those involved. The mayor and the councillor of Amsterdam saw this problem as one that required intervention by the national government to produce change. Since the likelihood of this happening seemed small, he was determined to make it a national issue and ‘to put it on the national agenda!’

(Inter) acting of three regimes of practices All three regimes of practices reflect the combination of specific ways of reasoning and governing in these sports. We explained the logic in each of the three regimes of practices by giving insights into the emergent (history) and routinised (culture) ways of thinking (rationality) and practicing (technologies) presupposed in each regime of practices. We briefly analyse the (inter) action of these regimes to understand the current impasse in regulation of FCMACS.

The results show that before the government began to ban events and implement policy goals through sport, commerce/sport institutions and government functioned almost totally independently. FCMACS regulated themselves using a mix of the sport and economic regimes of practices. The FCMACS sector was fragmented by conflict. Each gym/federation with its own set of hierarchical leaders used the economic and sport regime of practices to govern their sports. Very few rules were applicable for all at the national level. Federations made their own choices and only dealt with each other when they organised events. During the event, differences in regimes became visible in critical moments that required an immediate decision, such as when a fight needed to be stopped; who decided this and which rationale dominated (sport-safety or profit–excitement).

Until 2010, the public order and safety regime of practices was foregrounded incidentally and disappeared again to the background. It rarely played a role

103

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 103 Chapter 4

in governing these sports. People from the sector could ignore this regime of practices because there were no obligations, controls or sanctions. Consequently, these sports were directed by only two regimes that required minimal cooperation with others, including local and/or national governments. It was a sport in which financial survival of the fittest counted. Figure 2 depicts this situation.

Sport Economic regime regime Area of tension but self-regulated equilibrium

Public order & safety regime

Figure 2. Minimal influence of the public order and safety regime of practices in governing these sports.

The number of regimes of practices that are relevant for governing FCMACS increased however, due to further instrumentalisation of sports and the problematisation of fight events. This increase disturbed the status quo that consisted of a balance of fragmented internal hierarchies that regulated themselves. Government requirements and rules for subsidising activities in gyms and organising fight events made the public order and safety regime thinking about and practicing of these sports relevant and impossible to ignore. This rationality and its related way of governing and problematising issues have entered into (public) discussions about how to regulate these sports. More stakeholders with different institutional backgrounds have become relevant making the regulating of these sports more complicated.

While traditionally characterised by internal hierarchical conduct, FCMACS have been challenged to look beyond their boundaries for ways to agree on elementary rules about safety and public order at the national level. Their former hierarchical manner of governing has become problematic and a more horizontal way based on equality and cooperation is needed to respond adequately to new challenges in these sports.

104

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 104 Challenges in regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

Dialogues of the deaf In this new situation, as in the late-night show described in the beginning of the paper, three intermingled and intertwined regimes of practices have become relevant in discussions about these sports. Such dialogues seem to be quick and superficial and can be described as ‘dialogues of the deaf’ as shown in Figure 3.

Sport Economic regime regime Dialogues of the deaf

Public order & safety regime

Figure 3. Dialogues of deaf.

Three regimes of practices about FCMACS were expressed but not unravelled, discussed, or negotiated. This suggests that thus far no clear way of thinking, problematising and intervening in these sports has emerged.

Power vacuum Governmentality studies explore how regimes of practices operate and how forms of domination, relations of power and kinds of freedom and autonomy are linked (Dean 2010). Our study indicates that until the government started to ban events and to implement policy goals through sport, a mix of two regimes regulated FCMACS. In this mix none of the regimes became dominant or leading. This meant that choices had to be made as to which rationalities and technologies were to prevail in a specific situation. In the current situation, with its increase of stakeholders and regimes of practices, none of the regimes has become dominant nor has a method been found to make decisions using all three regimes of practices.

We conclude that no authority has been able to impose a definitive way of reasoning in this field of new interactions. Both the FCMACS sector and the Dutch government are unwilling and too fragmented to begin to take steps to enable the regulation of these sports at the national level. The use of different technologies in

105

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 105 Chapter 4

a few municipalities makes this issue even more complicated, especially for people from the FCMACS sector who want clear rules to minimise financial risks. The fragmentation and ambivalence in governing these sports creates a power vacuum at the national level. It seems that all govern, but no one actually governs the sector as a whole.

Discussion: why the impasse is maintained

We conclude that the impasse in the Netherlands can be explained by using the analogy of ‘dialogues of the deaf’ and the existence of a ‘power vacuum’ due to a new mix of regimes. The use of Dean’s conceptualisation of governmentality has revealed how different rationalities and technologies of power have become so entangled resulting in a lack of clarity as to which rules need to be created and which (mix of) rationalities should be followed. Power, traditionally exercised in a vertical hierarchical manner by the Dutch government and inside the FCMACS sector, is not applied. At the same time, new collaborative, cooperative ways of regulating these sports, using all of the relevant regimes of practices with its necessary, implicit horizontal conduct has not yet been developed. Consequently, the ‘traditional order’ of separate and hierarchical regulation that functioned as a status quo for many years still remains in place.

As indicated at the beginning of the paper, in other countries new institutional settings positioned between federations and the state were created to facilitate dialogues, discussions and decisionmaking in these sports (Berg and Chalip 2013). The solutions have consisted of the formation of state commissions (USA), of a combat sport platform (Flanders) and the creation of a new sport federation by the government (France) (Berg and Chalip 2013, Collinet and Delalandre 2013, Vertonghen et al. 2014). Dutch contemporary institutional settings in sports, commerce and government have thus far failed to organise, facilitate and coordinate the existing regimes of practices to move towards a way of regulating these sports. This impasse will likely remain in place until a new way of governing these sports using all relevant regimes of practices is accepted and institutionalised.

The use of the concept of governmentality as suggested by Dean (2010) gave in- depth insight into revealing how mixes of regimes of practices can work in regulating sports and in maintaining an impasse. The use of this concept of governmentality enabled us to discover the detailed historical and cultural background of these regimes of practices. This approach enabled us to analyse the complexity of this

106

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 106 Challenges in regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

issue and to move beyond the ‘relatively straightforward assumptions of resource dependency and “simple domination” that underpin many meso-level frameworks available for investigating policy processes and relationships between government, its agencies, and in this case, NGOs’ (Green and Houlihan 2006, p. 66). So its use proved to be essential to uncovering the complexity of various conflicting interests and ways of governing that fit in these regimes, not only for analysing the deadlock, but also as a starting point for looking for ways to breaking the status quo. Our study made clear that issues of regulation of sports at a national level need in depth insight into regimes of practices and (recent) changes in their relevance.

We conclude that Dean’s (2010) approach to governmentality was useful in our analysis of the complex issue in regulation of FCMACS in the Netherlands. Furthermore, we argue that use of this theoretical frame can shed new light on long-lasting, complex issues or recent challenges in regulation of sports in other countries and even at the international level, because it enables the disentanglement of various ways of reasoning and governing in its specific historical, cultural context. The use of the concept of governmentality as delineated by Dean (2010) may prevent researchers from unintentionally focusing on only one visible regime of practices and may help them to uncover the various layers that enable a complex situation to continue.

Notes 1. We are aware of discussion about the use of specific terminology in full-contact martial arts and combat sports (FCMACS). However, the discussion about the terminology goes beyond the purpose of this paper (see for example, Martínková and Parry 2016). In this paper, we therefore chose to refer to ‘full contact martial arts AND combat sports’ because both designations are relevant in discussions on regulation of FCMACS.

2. Talk show on TV Pauw & Witteman, 30 November 2012; Also available on the internet http://pauwenwitte man.vara.nl/Artikel.4215.0.html?tx_ttnews[tt_ news] = 28300&cHash = 44761bc1fe03a18a71c0e80c29ac1abf/) [Accessed 4 April 2014]

3. K-1 is a Japanese martial arts organization that combines techniques of Thai boxing, tae kwon do, karate, kung fu, kickboxing and traditional boxing. Each year a world K-1 tournament is held to determine which eight fighters may participate in K-1 World Grand Prix in Japan.

4. Document: Letter [federation] in 2012 to all mayors in which the federation

107

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 107 Chapter 4

presents itself as a reliable partner for municipalities. They offer advice about which gyms municipalities can work with.

5. Admission Regulations, membership NOC*NSF (Article 34 paragraph 1 sub b of the statutes of the NOC * NSF) (I.2.a) reads: A sports federation must be representative and act on behalf that sport at the national level, that is to say that the sport federation represents the majority of athletes in the respective discipline of sport, as well as representation in distribution and number in the Netherlands. (I.2.b) The federation needs be recognised by the international organisation. In the opinion of the NOC*NSF this organization must This organization must not only represent the sport at world level and as such is a member of SportAccord, as the Dutch representative of the sport.(I.7) In principle, only one federation per sport or a combination of disciplines of that sport is allowed. The, in the distinguish itself sufficiently from other disciplines of sport or sports, to be recognised as a specific discipline of sport.http:// nocnsf.nl/cms/showpage.aspx?id=505

6. Aikido Netherlands; Dutch Boxing Association; Judo Association Netherlands; Karate Do Association Netherlands; Taekwondo Federation Netherlands; Dutch Power sports and Fitness Federation; Federation of Eastern Martial Arts (FOG)

7. See http://fogevechtskunsten.nl/styled/styled-7/index.html

8. In 2014, this FOG consisted of 8186 individual members, had 14 sections and had 16 member organisations (see http://fogevechtskunsten.nl/styled/styled-7/ index.html)

9. Document: Letter [federation] in 2012 to all mayors to present themselves as the reliable partner for municipalities and their willingness to offer advice.

10. Letter of the councillor for sport to the Council of sport, 08 November 2011.

11. Child Protection in Sport Unit (CPSU) of National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) in the UK

12. Memo Gemeente Amsterdam aan de burgemeester 19–04-2012, onderwerp: Overleg inzake vechtsport d.d 20 April 2012 op verzoek van een aantal burgemeesters uit de provincie Noord-Holland. [Memo city of Amsterdam to the mayor 19 April 2012 in reaction to a request from several mayors in the Province of Noord-Holland.]

108

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 108 Challenges in regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

Funding This research has been carried out in the framework of the research programme Sport: Passion, Practice & Profit 2007–2010 financed by the Ministry of Public Health, Welfare and Sport, the Netherlands.

109

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 109 Chapter 4

References

Berg, B.K. and Chalip, L., 2013. Regulating the emerging: a policy discourse analysis of mixed martial arts legislation.International journal of sport policy and politics, 5 (1), 21–38. doi:10.1080/194069 40.2012.656685 Binnenlands Bestuur., 2011. Rotterdam wil strenger vechtsportbeleid [Rotterdam wants stricter martial arts policy]. Available from: http://www.binnenlandsbestuur.nl/bestuur-en-organisatie/ nieuws/rotterdam-wil-strenger-vecht sportbeleid.1411463.lynkx Breedveld, K., Kamphuis, C., and Tiessen-Raaphorst, A., 2008. Rapportage Sport 2008 [Report sport 2008]. Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau/W.J.H. Mulier Instituut. Brent, J.J. and Kraska, P.B., 2013. ‘Fighting is the Most Real and Honest Thing’: violence and the civilization/ barbarism dialectic. British journal of criminology, 53, 357–377. Advanced Access published 11 Feb 2013. doi:10.1093/bjc/ azt001 Chaker, A., 2004. Good governance in sport. A European survey. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing. Collinet, C. and Delalandre, M., 2013. Le Mixed Martial Arts et les ambigüité de sa sportification en France. Loisir et Société, 35 (2), 293–316. Collins, R., 2008. Violence. A micro-sociological theory. Princeton: Princeton University press. De Graaf, P., 2012. Kickboksers roepen op tot ‘zuivering’ van hun sport [Kickboxers call for “cleansing” of their sport]. De Volkskrant, 26 Nov. Dean, M., 2010. Governmentality. Power and rule in modern society. 2nd ed. London: Sage Publications Ltd. Dortants, M., and Van Bottenburg, M., 2013. Aanzien en overleven in een sport vol passie. Over regulering van full-contact vechtsporten [Respect and survive in a sport full of passion. Regulation of full contact martial arts]. Nieuwegein: Arko Sports Media. Dirks, B. 2012. Kickboksen voor een veiliger buurt [Kickboxing for a safer neighborhood]. De Volkskrant, 8 Mar. Elling, A. and Wisse, E., 2010. Beloften van vechtsport [Promises from martial arts]. Nieuwegein: Arko Sports Media. Foucault, M., 2007. Security, territory, population. Lectures at the Collège de France 1977–1978. New York: Picador Palgrave. Green, M. and Houlihan, B., 2006. Governmentality, modernization and the “disciplining” of national sporting organizations: Athletics in Australia and the United Kingdom. Sociology of sports journal, 23, 47–71. Kamerman, S., 2011. Gemeente leert boefjes meppen [Municipality learns to hit petty criminals]. NRC Handelsblad, Binnenland, 5 Aug, p. 8. Martínková, I. and Parry, J., 2016. Martial categories: clarification and classification. Journal of the philosophy of sport, 43 (1), 143–162. doi:10.1080/00948705.2015.1038829 Maxwell, J.A., 2005. Qualitative resarch design. An interactive approach. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. McKee, K., 2009. Post-foucauldian governmentality: what does it offer critical social policy analysis? Critical social policy, 29 (3), 465–486. doi:10.1177/0261018309105180 Noordhollands Dagblad., 2011. Kickboksen ís criminele sfeer [Kickboxing has criminal culture]. Enkhuizer Courant Editie, 17 May. RIEC Noord-Holland, 2012. Verwevenheid in de ring bij kickboksen, MMA, freefight en K1. Een onderzoek naar de aard en omvang van georganiseerde criminaliteit in relatie tot vechtsportevenementen in Noord-Holland [Interconnectedness in the ring in kickboxing, MMA, free fight and K1. An investigation into the nature and extent of organized crime in relation to fighting sports in North Holland]. Unpublished. Robson, C., 2011. Real world research. 3rd ed. Chichester: Wiley.

110

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 110 Challenges in regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports

Schildkamp, V., 2012. Kickboksfans komen echt niet voor potje schaak [Kickboxing fans do not come for ta game of chess]. Algemeen Dagblad, 12 Nov, p. 10. Smilde, W., 2012. De finale uppercut [The final uppercut]. De Volkskrant, 4 Aug, p. 21. Sportraad Amsterdam [Sport Council Amsterdam], 2011. Vechten voor ringsporten [Fighting for ring sports] Amsterdam: Sportraad Amsterdam. Opgehaald van. http://www.sportraadamsterdam. nl/system/attachments/19/original/Advies%20Vechten%20Voor%20Ringsporten%20 juli%202011%20A5.pdf Van Bottenburg, M., and Heilbron, J., 1996. De verharding van het wedstrijdvechten. Onderzoek in opdracht van het ministerie van VWS. Amsterdam: Onderzoekbureau Diopter. Van Bottenburg, M., and Heilbron, J., 2006. De-sportization of fighting contests: The origins and dynamics of no holds barred events and the theory of sportization. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 41, 259–282. Verseput, S., 2012. The show is over. Sport en Strategie, 6 Mar, 2 edition. Available from: www. sportenstrategie. Vertonghen, J., and Dortants, M., 2014. Report on the workshop “Organising, Managing and Regulating Martial Arts” during the 21st EASM conference. Revista de Artes Marciales Asiáticas, 8 (2), 480483. http://revpubli.unileon.es/ojs/ index.php/artesmarciales Vertonghen, J., et al., 2014. The organization and regulation of full contact martial arts: A case study of Flanders. Societies, 4 (4), 654–671. doi:10.3390/soc4040654 VNG, 2012. Vechtsportgala valt onder evenementenvergunning. [fightsport gala requires and event licence]. Available from: https://vng.nl/onderwerpenindex/veiligheid/nieuws/ vechtsportgala-in-apv-amsterdam [Accessed 15 March 2012]. Vugts, P., 2010a. Vechtsportgala’s vanuit de bajes georganiseerd [Fight sports gala’s organised from prison]. Het Parool, 22 May. Vugts, P., 2010b. Van der Laan wil freefightgala’s uit Amsterdam verbannen [Van der Laan wants to ban free fight gala in Amsterdam]. Het Parool, 4 Sep. Waardenburg, M., and Van Bottenburg, M., 2013. Country profile. Sport policy in the Netherlands. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 5 (3), 465–475. Yeo, A., et al., 2014. In-depth interviews. In: J. Ritche, J. Lewis, C. McNaughton Nicholls, and R. Ormston, eds. Qualitative reseaerch practice. A guide for social science students & researchers. Los Angeles: Sage Publications Ltd., 177–210.

111

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 111 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 112 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 113 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 114 5 Regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports: How Governmentality as an Analytical Framework informs practices of the Governing of Sports

Dortants, M. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics Accepted for publication: 22 September 2017

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 115 Chapter 5

Abstract

The governing of sport has recently shifted from self-regulation towards various forms of joint regulation. This study uses the concept of governmentality to analyse practices of governing Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports (FCMACS) in the Netherlands to answer the question of how the concept of governmentality informs the current and future governing of FCMACS. Dean’s methodological guidelines were used in the analysis of the consensus and contradictions in the rationalities and related technologies of power (regimes of practices) expressed in the regulation of FCMACS. According to the study’s respondents, future practices of the governing of FCMACS must enact equitable restrictions for all gyms and fight events and highlight the social value of FCMACS to facilitate them gaining the same status as regular sports. Such change requires practices of governing that combine authority and mediation with a climate open to self-regulation.

Keywords:

Governmentality, Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports, regimes of practices, joint governing, mediation, authority

116

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 116 Regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports: How Governmentality as an Analytical Framework informs practices of the Governing of Sports.

Introduction

Changes in the relationship between sport, commercial enterprises and local and national governments in recent years have affected the current self-regulation1 of sports. These changes are driven by a desire to implement necessary policy goals, the need to cooperate with new partners, to obtain (new) funding (Nagel et al. 2015) and/or for more compelling reasons like solving safety or ethical issues in sports such as Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports (FCMACS)2 (Berg and Chalip 2013). This study deals with the efforts to regulate FCMACS style kickboxing, Muay Tai and Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) in the Netherlands. Initially, these commercialised sports regulated themselves and were mainly organized parallel to traditional sports (Bottenburg and Heilbron 2006). However, since the successes of Dutch K-13 fighters, kickboxing is now the most common and popular style of FCMACS in the Netherlands. At the same time kickboxing is often criticised for its lack of safety and possible involvement in criminal activities. The practice of Muay Tai and MMA in the Netherlands is limited with practitioners seeming to change from one style to another or using multiple styles. This group of FCMACS faces ongoing criticism for its lack of self-regulation giving rise to the suggestion that these sports ought to be regulated by outsiders. However, given the multiplicity of backgrounds, perspectives, objectives and interests of FCMACS stakeholders, the task of joint governing of these sports increases in complexity.

This growing complexity and shift towards limiting autonomous self-regulation is the focus of the recent research being done on changes in the governing of sport. Gammelsæter (2010) (see also Stenling and Fahlén 2009) highlights the increased complexity occurring when commercial organisations become involved in the governing of sport. Other research on changes in the governing of sport also acknowledge this increased plurality and, in addition delineate how

1 In this study, I consider (self-) regulating synonymous with practices of (self- )governing sport. Although the use of ‘governing’ as noun is not common, I will use the construction ‘governing’ to emphasise the processual nature of practices in the governing of sport. 2 This study about regulation of FCMACS in the Netherlands is about Kickboxing, MuayTai and Mixed Martial Arts. These full contact sports are organised parallel to the traditional Dutch sport movement. Although MMA seems to be the topic of debate and critique in many countries, in the Netherlands the most popular and criticised style of FCMACS is kickboxing. Therefore, the main focus of this study will be on the regulation of kickboxing, because this style is controversial and/or problematic. But this study involves the regulation of other FCMACS like Muay Tai and MMA because these FCMACS are also regulated parallel to the traditional organised sports and face or will face the same problems as kickboxing has been experiencing in recent years. 3 K-1 is a Japanese martial arts that combines techniques of Thai boxing, taekwondo, karate, kung fu, kickboxing and traditional boxing. Each year, a world K-1 tournament was held to determine which eight fighters may participate in the K-1 World Grand Prix in Japan.

117

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 117 Chapter 5

increased government involvement in the sports management results in the loss of autonomous self-regulation (Green and Houlihan 2006, Phillpots et al. 2010). Sport organisations, once accustomed to a large degree of autonomy (Geeraert et al. 2014) currently need to deal with explicit government monitoring of the quality and results of their activities. Green and Houlihan (2006) state that government interference in sports has shown a ‘profound shift in the pattern of accountability away from traditional stakeholders and toward government and its agencies and commercial sponsors’ (p. 66). Fahlén et al. (2015) also problematise the loss of autonomy of sport organisations. They argue that sport self-regulation is at stake because sport organisations are too focused on achieving policy goals, internal organisation and conforming to governmental standards and norms. They call sport self-regulation an ‘illusory freedom’ and describe modernised practices of the governing of sport as ‘the promotion of entrepreneurial and autonomous recipients on the one hand and the ambition to control, coordinate and align recipients on the other hand’ (p. 292-293). In this setting routines of sport self-regulation are replaced by other practices of governing and consequently the power balance in the regulation of sport shifts. The governing of FCMACS in the Netherlands is a case in point. Since 2006 local and national Dutch governmental organisations have, through implicit and ad hoc means, regulated FCMACS and disrupted the autonomy of these highly commercialised sports that have operated almost separately of local and national governments.

Taken together, the research cited to this point focuses on the increasing complexity and shifting power balances in the governing of sport. Often sport organisations seem to be perceived as ‘victims’ of recent developments like commercialisation or of the involvement of governments in their affairs. In these studies little attention has been paid to the situated agency in adopting other rationalities and technologies of power. Given that neither the sport sector nor the government department is vying for control, it seems that the governing of sport is less bipolar than suggested in these studies. A bipolar conceptualization of power creates a hierarchy of those who have power over those who have little or no power and where power works oppressively, with limited attention to the interplay of power. In this study, I assume that sport organisations and government both have power and are involved in an ongoing “interplay of power”. In this process both stakeholders cooperate to make their rationality or ‘truth’ fit within the priority of governing towards securing preferred outcomes. By applying the concept of governmentality as an analytical framework I intend to give insights into the complexity and interplay of power that develops when more rationalities and technologies of power become relevant in practices of governing and to investigate the dilemmas that can arise due to the incongruity between various rationalities and technologies of power. The work of

118

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 118 Regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports: How Governmentality as an Analytical Framework informs practices of the Governing of Sports.

Bröckling et al. (2011), Dean (2010), Miller and Rose (2008) and Walters (2012) on governmentality as analytical framework will be used to deepen insights into the study of the current shifts in governing of sport. Use of the more general meaning of governmentality may contribute to a further development of the use of the concept of governmentality in the governing of sport as already done inter alia by Green and Houlihan (2006), Houlihan and Green (2009), Sam (2009) and Grix and Brannagan (2016). By applying this analytical framework, I will critically question and investigate consent and contradictions into what is considered as ‘the truth’ in governing FCMACS, including how technologies of power are directed by specific rationalities.

This study analyses the effects of the shift in practices of governing FCMACS from self-regulation to joint regulation with local and national governments in the Netherlands and attempts to determine what practices of governing provide the best practices for governing. The concept of governmentality will be employed as an analytical framework to elicit insights into the complexity of the interplay of power in the practices of the joint governing of FCMACS, not as ‘the’ governmentality or ‘truth’ of FCMACS. The question that guides this study is how can the use of the concept of governmentality as an analytical framework inform the governing of FCMACS?

Governmentality defined as an Analytical Framework to analyse the Governing of Sport

Foucault’s concept of governmentality was based on his study of power and the regulation of populations. After his death, various scholars adopted the key ideas and terminology of Foucault’s brief writings on governmentality and developed the concept of governmentality further (Walters 2012). A general meaning and a historically specific version of the concept of governmentality can be distinguished in the literature (Dean 2010). However, in this study I will rely less on studies of scholars who elaborated the historically specific version of the concept as these studies concentrate on a critique and the specific liberal rationality of government that Foucault relates to ‘biopolitics’. My study emphasises the analytic power of the concept of governmentality in a more general way to evaluate complex issues in the governing of sports. I will also analyse various ways of thinking about practices of governing (Dean 2010).

According to Walters (2012) and Dean (2010), the concept of governmentality is

119

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 119 Chapter 5

directed by various rationalities and can be used as an analytical framework to examine the exercise of power that shapes the governing of oneself and others. In this approach, power is conceptualised as multicentred and as a multiplicity of interrelated rationalities and technologies of power that are relevant in the art of governing. Bröckling et al. (2011), Dean (2010), Miller and Rose (2008) and Walters (2012) developed the concept of governmentality by using the notions of technologies (practices) and rationalities(thinking) of (self-) governing. Bröckling et al. state that ‘analyses of governmentality are centred on the question of how practices and thinking about these practices constitute themselves mutually, or more precisely: how they translate into each other’ (2011, p. 11). Dean also focuses his analyses on the interrelationship between ways of reasoning and governing and elaborates on the concept of governmentality using what he called ‘regimes of practices’. He explores ‘how thought operates within our organized ways of doing things, our regimes of practices, and with its ambitions and effects’ (Dean 2010, p. 27). So using governmentality as analytical framework reveals various regimes of practices as a variety of routines, consistent ways of doing things and focussing on how thinking and governing are interrelated. A regime of practice can be analysed by exploring by what means, mechanisms, procedures, instruments, tactics, techniques, technologies and vocabularies authority is constituted and order is achieved. These technologies of power are related to specific rationalities or ways of reasoning that can be analysed by questioning the forms of thought, knowledge, expertise, strategies, means of calculation, or rationalities that are employed in practices of government (Dean 2010, pp. 41-44).

Given that governing is not a neutral activity, a critical analysis must question the history, truths and ‘taken for granted’ assumptions that underly the truths in reasoning and governing, including the knowledge claims used to give credibility to specific truths. The expanded concept of governmentality as a combination of regimes of practices also brings several histories, truths and assumptions together into a complex mixture; consequently, this study addresses the assumptions and complexities. Furthermore, since governing is obviously normative and thus about what people ought and ought not to do, these normative ‘truths’ are constructions and thus always circumspect. An analysis of the governing of FCMACS is therefore about the negotiations of various ‘truths’ about FCMACS that direct the ways of governing oneself and others in these sports. This analysis also focuses on the attempts of governing by imposing norms or ‘truths’on oneself and others and on the resistance to such impositions and related forms of governing (counter- conduct). The critical analysis of this conduct and counter-conduct is relevant as these counter-conducts reveal possibilities for how practices of the governing of sports may evolve (Dean 2010, Walters 2012).

120

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 120 Regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports: How Governmentality as an Analytical Framework informs practices of the Governing of Sports.

I elaborate on Dean’s conceptualisation of regimes of practices by using the dimensions of rationalities, as the specific way of thinking (reasoning) about what is considered as ‘the truth’, and of technologies (or techniques or mechanisms) as specific ways of acting, intervening and directing (Dean 2010). In a previous study (Dortants et al. 2016), my colleagues and I found that the three relevant regimes of practices for governing the FCMACS in the Netherlands that stakeholders of the FCMACS sector and of local and national governments drew on were the sport, economics and safety regimes. The sport regime of practices represents a way of reasoning and governing in which FCMACS are seen like all other sports in the Netherlands. Stakeholders who reason from a sport regime of practices suggest that the fragmented unorganised FCMACS need to be governed by one strong national federation, as is done in other sports. Various other stakeholders (also) use an economic regime of practices to argue that FCMACS are businesses with many people deriving their livelihood from managing their own gyms and organizing fight events. FCMACS operate in an open, unregulated marketplace where the notion of the ‘survival of the fittest’ prevails. Finally the public order and safety regime of practices constructs FCMACS as promoting dangerous activities and fostering ties with criminal organisations that are directly or indirectly involved in activities like the laundering of money, blackmail and violence. Local legislation such as permits and licences are technologies of power related to these rationalities and, until recently, although ad hoc, are relevant to the governing of FCMACS in the Netherlands. In the study that follows, these three regimes of practices partially overlap while contradictions in claims regarding ‘the truth’ about FCMACS remain in what Dean calls (2010, p. 4) an ‘inconvenient dissonance’ between the regimes. The analysis of consensus and contradiction will reveal this inconvenient dissonance and the related conflicting forces as result of practices of governing and resistance to it (Bröckling et al. 2011, p. 13). Such insights can inform the future governing of FCMACS by identifying agreement on issues that must be solved including how preferred technologies of power could be recycled to develop a more informed practice for the governing of sports.

121

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 121 Chapter 5

The History of the Present: Self-regulation of the FCMACS in the Netherlands

When using governmentality as an analytical framework, the various regimes of practices imply a situated analysis of the ‘games’ of governing where certain historical-cultural determined technologies of power are linked with specific rationalities and presented as ‘the truth’. This includes the understanding of how FCMACS have evolved over time and provides insight into the underlying processes and structures that reveal why the governing of FCMACS has become problematic. The following brief history provides a context for how the FCMACS in the Netherlands have been governed.

FCMACS, especially kickboxing, developed rapidly in the Netherlands in the 1970s and 1980s. These sports quickly commercialised and, in many cases, split up due to conflicts about styles, techniques and money, resulting in a mushrooming number of FCMACS gyms and federations (Bottenburg and Heilbron 1996, Dortants and Bottenburg 2013, Dortants et al. 2016). Most federations were affiliated with a promoter and engaged primarily in the organisation of fight events. These federations took on few, if any, of the traditional tasks of sport federations such as the education and training of coaches and referees and/or the organisation of national competitions. Coaches in FCMACS often had multiple conflicting roles, serving not only as a coach but also as the promoter or manager of gyms/sports centres, of fighters and/or federations, and in some cases, also as part-time as civil servants. Cooperation between federations was infrequent due mostly to long lasting conflicts and feuds between coaches (Dortants et al. 2016) and occured mainly only in the matching of fighters. As there was no commonality in the self-regulation of FCMACS at the national level as is typical in other sports, each federation had its own set of rules and tried to survive.

Despite conflicts and intense competition between gyms and federations, FCMACS have become popular. Kickboxing is especially popular due mainly to the global successes of the highest (K1) class Dutch kickboxers since 1993 and to sport participation programmes sponsored by the national government (Elling and Wisse 2010, Rana 2014). Gyms were quite successful in generating financial support using a national government programme that stimulates participation in sports (Meedoen alle Jeugd door sport, 2006-2010). One hundred FCMACS gyms participated in this programme and were able to attract a total of 8256 new members to their gyms (Hoekman et al. 2011). The FCMACS participation in government programmes meant that gyms had to meet certain quality standards

122

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 122 Regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports: How Governmentality as an Analytical Framework informs practices of the Governing of Sports.

and be financially accountable for the use of grants. Consequently, by participating in these government programmes, the FCMACS became more visible to the local government, politicians and the public.

These government subsidies for FCMACS gyms were criticised mainly by right wing political groups who assumed that these sports would teach youngsters from suspect socio-economic neighbourhoods’ martial arts techniques that could potentially be used in conducting criminal activities (Kamerman 2011). These criticisms were reinforced by incidents involving spectator violence during events, the use of fight techniques by (famous) kick-boxers outside the ring and by the accusation of links existing between FCMACS and criminal organisations. Such incidents and criticisms were widely reported in the media. Consequently, in 2010, the mayor of Amsterdam banned large commercial fight events from Amsterdam, contending that fight events were places where criminals met (Vugts 2010). The lack of self-regulation of FCMACS to guarantee the safety of fighters, the safety of the public, to prevent violence in public places and to disprove of its link with criminality became an issue of public discussion. In these debates, even the legitimacy of FCMACS was questioned, something which rarely happens in other sports like football or tennis. Managers and coaches from the FCMACS sector were not united, which increasingly complicated discussions about the governing of these sports and made the defences against the allegations of violence fragmented and powerless (Dortants et al. 2016). The call for national government intervention grew and by the end of 2012, individuals from both the FCMACS sector and from the (local) government called for the government to intervene and to assist the FCMACS sector in self-regulation. This call for state involvement could not be ignored although such interference was inconsistent with Dutch government policy characterised by the decentralisation and deregulation of sports and the use of a non-interventionist sport legislation model (Chaker 2004, Siekmann and Soek 2010). Consequently, stakeholders began to talk about a form of managing the self-regulating FCMACS where the sport sector and the government would work together to solve the issues in these sports. Some stakeholders favoured a development like in the USA where stakeholders in MMA not only worked together with government in regulation of MMA (Berg and Chalip 2013) but also openly doubted whether this model of governing would work in the Dutch context.

123

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 123 Chapter 5

Methodology

This study is part of a larger work in which I evaluated FCMACS using the concept of governmentality as analytical framework and is based on an interpretative approach inspired by post-structuralism (Bevir and Rhodes 2015). I used Dean (2010), Miller and Rose (2008), Bröckling et al. (2011) and Walter’s (2012) work on governmentality to analyse various ways of reasoning used to construct problems and solutions in resolving issues in the governing of FCMACS. This theoretical framework assisted my focus on the ‘taken for granted assumptions’ or ‘rationalities’ presented as ‘truths’ about FCMACS and how these are related to the preferred ways of governing. In a previous study (Dortants et al. 2016), my colleagues and I identified the most relevant regimes of practices. In this current study, I focus on consensus or mutual agreement, on constructions of differentiation and on ambiguity in reasoning (Martin 2002). These foci provide insights into agreements, contradictions and ambiguity and into conduct and counter-conducts for current and future patterns of governing. The study revealed possibilities into thinking in alternative ways about practices of governing for these sports and exposed the difficulties that can be expected due to the persistence of contradictions. It also explained how most stakeholders would manage self-regulation.

I conducted 43 interviews with a variety of stakeholders from the FCMACS sector (coaches, fighters, promoters, managers, a referee, directors of federations), with national and local civil servants, a city mayor and alderman, a member of a local advisory commission on sport, police and a representative from the Dutch sport umbrella organisation (NOC*NSF). The snowball method was used to find individuals from different groups of stakeholders in FCMACS and governmental organisations. During the interviews, that lasted 1-2.5 h, I asked respondents to discuss the problems and possible solutions in regulating FCMACS. I also explored with them their perception of the value of self-regulation and future practices for governing FCMACS. Cooperation in regulation of FCMACS had not yet begun at the time when the interviews were conducted.

All interviews were recorded and imported in NVivo. Documents of governmental organisations, federations and (social) media (newspapers, websites, TV, Twitter and fora) were analysed and meetings were observed to obtain further insight into the discussion on how FCMACS were governed. The data were coded along constructions of problems. The solutions, including rationalities, revealed how these stakeholders reasoned and demonstrated their historical-cultural preferred ways of governing (technologies of power). The data initially revealed three regimes of

124

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 124 Regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports: How Governmentality as an Analytical Framework informs practices of the Governing of Sports.

practices as described elsewhere in study 1 (Dortants et al. 2016). The examination of the consent and contradictions in the constructions of problems and suggestions for solutions appears in the section below.

Consent and Contradictions in Reasoning in search for new Truths about FCMACS

Notwithstanding the consensus on the identification of two issues to be governed, the issues were simultaneously full of contradiction due to the conflicting truths about FCMACS and the preferred ways of governing used. An explanation of these two issues follows, including the contradictions that emerge from the dissonance of the regimes of practices employed.

Issue 1: Need for balanced equitably Restrictions Although historically FCMCAS enjoyed support for their autonomy, modern stakeholders asked for various regulations restricting options in these sports. Given the inability of the FCMACS sector to guarantee the safety of fighters, protect the general public, prevent violence and refrain from associating with criminal elements, most of the respondents acknowledge that a balanced intervention from outside of the sector is essential to the continuity and development of FCMACS. The following requested restrictions are for gyms and events.

Restrictions for Gyms Because the FCMACS sector is fragmented, full of distrust and focussed on earning money, it is unable to offer training courses for coaches and to monitor or control their pedagogical qualities (see Dortants et al. 2016). Most respondents insist that mandatory standards must be required of owners and coaches of gyms, given their instructive roles. Presently, none of the FCMACS have requirements for opening a gym. A trainer used a public order and safety rationale to contend that ‘anyone can start a gym where the boys are not taught properly, and/or maybe engage in criminal activities, so this [lack of restrictions on gyms] is very dangerous’. Here the use of a public order and safety rationale overlaps with the sport rationale referring to the need for well-educated coaches in gyms (sport) and measures that prevent the misuse of fighting techniques outside the gym (safety).

In addition to educational requirements, some stakeholders draw on the public order and safety rationale to argue that it is necessary for coaches to also undergo a criminal records check. Respondents want coaches to be reputable and to prevent

125

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 125 Chapter 5

those with criminal records from coaching or owning gyms. A trainer tentatively explained, ‘Well that [criminal records check] is of course a very tricky subject… they should look for evidence of good behaviour in certain areas’. However, the sector is unable to bar coaches with a criminal record because those disqualified can simply ignore the ruling and start-up their own gym or federation. Some stakeholders are also hesitant to endorse the proposed restrictions since using only reputable, well- educated coaches requires an investment of time and money and the economic rationale suggests that avoiding the restrictions is much cheaper. All stakeholders agree that qualifications are needed but are sceptical because the gym profit margins are quite limited so, the question of ‘who is going to pay?’ has tended to keep a solution at bay.

Restrictions for Fight Events In addition to developing requirement for gyms, stakeholders also discussed necessary restrictions for the organisation of fight events for the safety of fighters and to prevent links with violence and criminality. Currently, there are no regulations for organising any fight events, regardless of whether it is a small, local event financed by a local coach/promoter or a large, international commercial event. A trainer explains how most events take place – out of the publics’ sight:

Yes, I can now organize a club contest […] fight events in sport halls every weekend – two, three times each weekend throughout the year [.] And nobody knows that this happens, except for the in-crowd. Nobody controls it.

Promoters seem to be motivated by economic interests and according to some interviewees tend to be ‘cowboys who want to survive’. A coach/promoter explains: ‘It’s a tour de force to cover the costs of events. Fighters are too used to getting a certain amount of money’. As Woolf et al (2016) conclude, also in the Netherlands most coaches and fighters need to search for additional earnings to practise their sport full time. Extra income may be generated by recreational participants who pay membership fees, by attracting sponsors for fights or by cutting the costs involved in ensuring the safety of fighters. The narrow profit margins create these and other dilemmas. According to FCMACS stakeholders, sponsors in the past were frequently involved in illegal activities and often associated with the underworld, but they were the only sponsors that were willing to support FCMACS. Ensuring the safety of fighters is costly due to both the expense of medical tests and fights-per-fighter restrictions which limited each contestant’s potential income. However, coaches and promoters also approach this issue from a long-term strategy perspective. The promoter of talented fighters guards the health, safety and longevity of fighters because ‘they are worth a lot. We want to use them for a longer period’. Such a

126

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 126 Regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports: How Governmentality as an Analytical Framework informs practices of the Governing of Sports.

promoter sees fighters as a product that is valuable from a commercial point of view. According to an ex-fighter/advisor ‘fighters are an important source of income for trainers’. So coaches are eager to keep successful fighters in their gym for a longer period of time.

Most respondents use a sport rationale to compare FCMACS with other sports when they question the limited protection of fighters by federations in competitions. But there is no central register of essential FCMACS fight data – the number of fights in which an individual fighter participates, of fight knock outs and other injuries and of any misbehaviour of fighters and/or coaches. Various federations have their own registration with, at the very least, a fighter passport and receive a membership fee from each member. A trainer explained how not having registrations can lead to unsafe bouts: ‘for instance there is not even control on who was knocked out last week [.] Theoretically speaking, [I could] let someone go into the ring to be punched out every week six times consecutively. No one notices that!’ Here the safety and economic rationalities collide; the safety rationale demands that attention be paid to the well-being of the athletes while fewer limitations on matching fighters increase profits in the short term. In general, the respondents from the FCMACS sector did not question the presence of child fighters or make it a contentious issue. Stakeholders using both sport and economic rationalities justified having children in fighting bouts depending on the rules established by the particular federation in charge of the event. Although research (Baker et al. 2009, Malina 2010, Capranica et al. 2011) suggests that early specialisation of child athletes could have negative consequences, it is assumed by the stakeholders and presented as a truth that children should be trained early to become successful athletes, that is full-fledged adult fighters. Some 7 – 9-year-old boys are so talented that trainers want to schedule them for fights to develop their skills as fighters. One of the trainers expressed concerns about the age of fighters in relation to the absence of a national registration system of fights. He explained that this means a match between two 16-year olds can be dangerous because of a vast difference in experience. An economic rationality supports bouts by children, often to support the adult programme in small and medium events. The events involving children are lucrative because they attract many extra spectators – family and friends related to the child, who all pay an entrance to see the child perform. These organised fights by children can therefore cover costs and result in much needed extra income.

The ban of large commercial fight events in some cities can be justified from a public order and safety rationale as a means of preventing the inadvertent

127

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 127 Chapter 5

hosting of criminal organisations through permitting large fight events. Although promoters can move to other cities, the perceived unpredictability of local policy regarding allowing fight events has led promoters to ask for clear regulations to be applied in all Dutch municipalities. Reports are circulating about recent cancelations of fight events in cities because licences were abruptly revoked for unclear reasons causing what is considered a financial disaster for promoters. A somewhat frustrated promoter declares: ‘Each municipality has a different policy. There should be legislation, that is good, but [it should be] the same for each city’. The public order and safety rationale has become intertwined with the leading sport and economic rationale and as a result, the ways of reasoning in the FCMACS seems to be experiencing some change.

Although there seems to be agreement that restrictions are needed, a group participating in an online forum explains that they are concerned about the consequences of regulating fight events. The group’s basic fear is that the sports will diminish, as this forum participant expresses:

The initiative is not bad, but I worry that the government is going to interfere seriously with the sport. All the demands will ensure that all serious money will disappear from the sport (something that has been going on for a while), and there will be no major sponsors or subsidies. So, our country will play a marginalized role instead of being a leader. (Mixfight.nl Forum 03-8-2014).

Such forum participants reason that too many rules and control from a public order and safety regime will kill the entrepreneurial spirit in these sports. However, others reason from the same rationale and conclude that rules and control will make the sports fairer, cleaner and therefore more attractive for legal sponsors. This way of reasoning is congruent with the research results of Berg and Chalip (2013) in the USA. They conclude that lobbying of the UFC4 for active government involvement in the regulation of MMA resulted in increased popularity of MMA and a rise of income for UFC. In summary, the stakeholders agree that a certain level of regulation with restrictions is needed, but want such regulations balanced, with all rationalities and interests taken into account. 2

4 the Ultimate Fighting Championship® (UFC®) started in 1993 as a professional mixed martial arts (MMA) organisation. UFC has revolutionised the fight business and today stands as the world’s leading MMA promoter, offering the premier series of MMA sports events that have sold out some of the biggest arenas and stadiums across the globe ( http://www.ufc.com/discover/ufc/index)

128

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 128 Regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports: How Governmentality as an Analytical Framework informs practices of the Governing of Sports.

Issue 2: Need for Recognition for Societal Legitimacy of FCMACS FCMACS struggle with their societal legitimacy which, according to stakeholders, is due to negative stereotypes and prejudices about FCMACS. These stereotypes and prejudices, also known as ‘stigmatisation’, join the misconduct and malpractices in the sector itself. But many stakeholders understand that FCMACS must be valued primarily as being successful sports and recognised for their role in helping solve social issues and entertaining large groups of fans. These stakeholders plead for a reorganisation of FCMACS to justify this positive judgement of FCMACS. A young fighter summarised it well in saying that ‘FCMACS is a raw diamond that needs to be polished’.

Reassessed as mainstream Sports Stakeholders use a sport rationality to argue that FCMACS should be seen and valued as are the country’s regular sports because, at the moment, FCMACS are largely invisible to the general public and the media. A passionate manager exclaims, ‘Netherlands wake up, we have the most [kickboxing] champions in the world’. Unfortunately for FCMACS athletes and supporters, they are often viewed with suspicion by those using a public order and safety rationality when both the positive and unsavoury sides of FCMACS emerge. A coach admits that ‘we, uhm, you’ve been labelled as a criminal if you do this sport’. A coach also sees the other side to this and believes that those in FCMACS have to improve to ensure that ‘the wrong figures do not become role models’. Stakeholders long for the day that FCMACS have the same status as regular competitive sports. A fighter explains,

We would like to become more mainstream. And mainstream means that martial arts has a safe image, where you can go to an event on Saturday afternoon as a father or mother with your children. And that the whole idea of big-shouldered men involved in crime and doing negative things has disappeared.

For FCMACS stakeholders, the dream of being a normal sport entails practicing at a gym, having regular events in each city, and being broadcasted on mainstream TV channels, not just commercial TV channels. However, the dream hinges on public order and safety concerns be addressed.

Sports with social value In spite of a few reservations, the majority of stakeholders agreed that FCMACS could be valuable for society. The promotion of participation in kickboxing could be considered as a governmental tool (Rana 2014). Some believe the basic claim that these sports are fulfilling valuable governmental and societal policy goals

129

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 129 Chapter 5

like disciplining young people with problems and integrating youngsters from a challenged background into mainstream society. A trainer explained it thus, ‘many children who practice these sports can’t control their emotions. Martial arts teach them to control their emotions when they adopt the norms and values of martial arts’. However, many stakeholders acknowledge, in line with work of Chalip (2006), that the value of sport depends on how it is managed. So the value to society of FCMACS requires a stricter regulation of FCMACS and needs to include developing trainers with outstanding pedagogic skills. The research of Vertonghen and Theeboom (2010) and Theeboom (2012) also indicates that the teaching approach is relevant for the intended social-psychological outcome of practising martial arts. Many interviewees think that a limited number of coaches have these special skills.

The other argument used by stakeholders viewing FCMACS as having a positive social value focuses on the entertainment aspect of the sector. These stakeholders described FCMACS events as spectacles, offering very attractive events with laser shows, strong engaging music, famous ring speakers, big screens, sexy young women on catwalks and of course, exciting fights. They also admit that in the past, it was impossible to organise these large showy events completely legally: ‘Look, those large gala’s become more difficult to organize now. That’s because, yes, at a given moment with black money and that kind of thing ... Listen, you do not have to be a financial expert to see that’. Some stakeholders worry that since sensational aspects are often associated with criminality and illegal money, a strict regulating of FCMACS might mean less emphasis on the exciting and showy elements in fight events. With large audiences needed to cover the cost of an event and generate revenue, fewer showy spectacles means that fight events are more like an ordinary sport event and therefore, in the end, less profitable and attractive to fans. Stakeholders compare it with the development of boxing in the Netherlands that not only became strictly regulated but also less popular than kickboxing. However, the research of Bottenburg and Heilbron (2006) and Berg and Chalip (2013) shows that the organisation UFC in the USA was able to balance the attention to fighting skills and safety issues with the allure of the show and spectacle associated with these events and turned them into a very lucrative business.

Becoming more like mainstream sports also means operating in the open, conforming to rules similar to those governing other sports and therefore more sensitive to criticism. Guidelines to deal with contemporary top fighters and coaches whose character and behaviour is morally suspect will need to be developed. Simply put, the full challenge is finding a balance between economic survival and being clean, that is operating in a transparent, legal and fair way as required in mainstream sports.

130

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 130 Regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports: How Governmentality as an Analytical Framework informs practices of the Governing of Sports.

Preferred Ways of governing in dealing with Issues. In addition to the overlap in reasoning the various interrelated regimes of practices described in the previous sections, I also point out the tensions occurring regarding regulation, conflicting forces and ambiguities in reasoning. The data do not reveal a best way of governing of FCMACS however, stakeholders suggest that there are two aspects of governing that are crucial in moving towards a form of joint regulation. As the first step in basic governing, an accepted authority is needed to move towards achieving regulation and, second, a mediating approach or mutuality of intent is required to overcome any existing or latent distrust and hostility to allow for success in future governing. Authority is considered to be hierarchical and to contain clear, unambiguous rules for governing. Mediation reflects ‘subtle and interactive forms of regulation that rely on an on-going situated communication and negotiation between public authorities and all sorts of relevant stakeholders’ (Pedersen et al. 2011, pp. 387-388). According to the stakeholders, a combination of both authoritative and mediating forms of governing is needed to move forward towards managed self-regulation.

In search for Authority to regulate Many stakeholders of the sector explain that those involved in FCMACS are accustomed to authoritarian forms of conduct, meaning that in a gym ‘there’s a complete hierarchical structure’ (see also Dortants and Knoppers 2013). The structure of all FCMACS is based on the principle that the teacher or sensei is boss and students are obligated to do what the teacher or sensei demands. Since each gym and federation has its own authority, some respondents suggest a meta-governor/ authority is needed to govern all the local authorities of gyms and federations. A trainer compares the situation with France where one authority is unambiguously in charge of regulating all local authorities:

In France, it [FCMACS] is also very well organized. There you have many different organisations that all are accountable to the Ministry for Sport and they are quite strict [.] [there is] one organisation with one set of rules that everyone must meet.

Others refer to a state athletic commission such as in the USA that is, although mainly focussed on regulation of fight events, seen as the best possible authority: ‘As a promoter you will not get far if your finances are not well organized. Fighters must always get paid, [.], the promoter has to conform to all the regulations. That is perfect’. However, some of the stakeholders also see drawbacks in having one

131

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 131 Chapter 5

ruling commission. For example, a fighter argues that such a commission would have ‘too much power and they abuse that power’. Despite these objections, this search for an institutionalised meta-governing authority can be understood as part of the FCMACS’ historical-cultural hierarchical way of governing since, as a trainer says ‘don’t blame us, we come from a martial arts culture’.

In the past decades, the FCMACS have been unable to develop an overall self- regulating practice. Consequently, the best case scenario now would be to see them accepting a hierarchical regulatory structure in order to eventually move towards adopting self-regulation. Like many others, a coach/promoter thinks that it is an illusion to think that the sector is going to regulate itself. ‘It won’t happen without coercion, so it needs to be done top down’. Most stakeholders point to the government as the one and only meta-governor/authority that can govern. Even if a federation were to attempt to take the lead in governing, stakeholders state that it would be powerless and fail without government support. The growing realisation that government regulation is needed is reflected in the demand by the respondents for not only regulation by a strong external authority but also for an authority to unite them to facilitate self-regulation, if necessary with coercion. A trainer/promoter describes what this authority must do: ‘Get those people from all federations together, appoint a chair who can act decisively and who has to power to govern’.

Technologies of power that are congruent with the public order and safety regimes of practices seem to be favoured in the argument for regulation by a strong external authority. Preferred technologies of power from the sport and economic regime of practices have been shown to be inadequate in self-regulation. Although the stakeholders call for clear regulation at the national level, there is no explicit demand for national sport laws. Many stakeholders suggest that existing local legislation can be the instrument to coerce FCMACS to work towards self-regulation. A coach explains how it can work: ‘Many coaches and promoters use public buildings for their activities. So, then you [local government] can make demands [on coaches and promoters] and say “listen, we only rent to people who meet our requirements”’. The stakeholders are aware that local legislation can provide technologies of power such as criminal and financial records checks and licencing of gyms and events that comply with all rules, but there is no agreement about the efficacy of these technologies of power in FCMACS.

Besides a loose acknowledgement that the government should intervene with authority in these sports, the respondents also agree that there is a danger of too much government involvement or overregulation. A coach argues that ‘there also

132

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 132 Regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports: How Governmentality as an Analytical Framework informs practices of the Governing of Sports.

needs to be balance, not an overkill of regulations, because there has to be a certain degree of freedom’. Although the research of Berg and Chalip (2013) shows the opposite developments in the USA, some stakeholders in the Netherlands even claim that strict regulations will destroy FCMACS. Some of those critical voices can be heard on the internet: ‘I am unfortunately one of the few people who believe that government regulation, with a whole package of conditions and regulations, is a blow to our sports, simply because I’ve seen this in other sports. Sports may vanish in bureaucracy’ (mixfight.nl Forum 02-08-2014). The question is whether the successes of regulation of MMA in the USA could be compared with developments in the Netherlands. The fear of overregulation may originate from the knowledge that Dutch FCMACS sector proved to be too fragmented and weak in organisation to become a serious partner for negotiation with the government. Consequently, they could be overruled more easily by government regulation than what happened in the USA represented by a united powerful UFC organisation speaking for the FCMACS sector.

Mediating opposing Forces Many FCMACS stakeholders envision a moderate and inclusionary authority that is based on discussion, exchange of views, mediation and member interests governing FCMACS such an approach would serve to overcome prejudices and result in balanced practices of governing. The respondents suggest that self- regulation should start with consultation and cooperation among the different gyms, federations, managers and promoters. A coach/promoter explains: ‘Yeah, I think you need to make sure we have a “we-feeling”... Yeah ... we need to open our closed houses to show how we do things ...work together more closely and organize events together’. Some stakeholders assume that cooperation will also enable the FCMACS to unite, facilitating cooperation with representatives of public organisations. Having a common enemy or a central authority could be helpful in uniting FCMACS, even using coercion if necessary. A trainer explains: ‘Look at what these mayors do now [ban events], well it [creating unity] has worked’. It is no surprise that the respondents ask the government to help the FCMACS sector in its efforts to create a degree of regulatory unity and uniformity.

Stakeholders not only want mediation and dialogue within the FCMACS to become more influential in negotiations but also to establish communication and negotiation between the FCMACS sector and the public sector. Here too, just like within the FCMACS’ sector, mutual mistrust and prejudice needs to be set aside in order to be able to govern jointly. However, stakeholders assign an important step to the public sector. A coach/promoter/civil servant explains with some frustration:

133

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 133 Chapter 5

I think they [representatives of public organisations] have too little understanding, they just look at the surface, you need to go to an event, or to a gym, look at how fighters train together, how they prepare, how they deal with each other. You need to go beyond the surface; otherwise you’re just talking.

The FCMACS has often functioned in the shadow of society. Various stakeholders suggest that organising meetings with all kind of stakeholders is an important way of subtle governing. An ongoing situated communication between outsiders and insiders of FCMACS might work as what is called ‘soft power’ in regulation (Grix and Brannagan 2016). Not coercion, but technologies of power such as attraction and seduction done with credibility can result in discussion, dialogue and mutual respect thus creating a basis for agreement on issues and serving as a basis for cooperative governing of sport.

Meetings between national sport federations and (local) governments are infrequent in the Netherlands and only happen when (public order) incidents occur and large events are organised. The various federations of FCMACS had flown under the radar of government coordination until 24-01-2013 when the mayor of Amsterdam broke this deadlock by organising a meeting to discuss joint regulation with representatives of (national and local) governments and FCMACS. This was the first time those involved met and spoke to each other in an organised way; the purpose of the meeting was, according to a civil servant, ‘to raise public support for plans to intervene, step by step’. A report posted by an attendee the day after a forum for FCMACS illustrates the unique nature of this event and the urgent need for joint intervention in these sports:

The conference was in this sense a milestone and hopefully a turning point in the Dutch martial arts sector. In a few years, this will be referred to as the moment when the martial arts world, in cooperation with the government, took a new direction. (Mixfight.nl Forum, 25-01-2013).

This first full contact martial arts conference seems to symbolise the first step in mediation in the search for a renewed regulation of these sports in the Netherlands. In his closing speech of this event the mayor asked everyone present at the conference to try to establish a committee that would help the sector to regulate the sports, and he called for a joint effort to reorganise these sports (field notes 24- 01-2013).

134

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 134 Regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports: How Governmentality as an Analytical Framework informs practices of the Governing of Sports.

Discussion and conclusion

This analysis of the process for an appropriate practice for the governing of FCMACS in the Netherlands revealed that changes in the context made the truths and routines of governing of these sports fluid, negotiable and adaptable. Since the number of regimes of practices relevant in regulation of FCMACS has been increased, the ‘truths’ about FCMACS and its related ways of governing started to shift and intermingle. Although stakeholders may favour one or two regimes of practices, in interviews they appeared to use changing, varying and overlapping regimes of practices, probably to adapt to the changing circumstances in governing practices in FCMACS. This change and the emerging overlap between regimes could constitute a (partial) shared understanding or consensus on specific issues and could be compared with what Shilbury and Ferkins (2015) and Shilbury et al (2016) describe as the need for achieving mutual understanding in collaborate forms of governing. The results also show that this agreement on issues contains different, often conflicting and ambiguous ways of reasoning that will complicate the governing of FCMACS. However, the uncovering of these contradictions and ambiguities also informs future governing by showing potential sources of resistance or counter-conduct in the governing of FCMACS.

The use of the concept governmentality enabled me to go beyond a basic bipolar analysis of power in governing that seems to construct sport and government organisations as oppositional. Instead, the results suggest that researchers and policy makers need to take into account a multiplicity of ways in thinking about governing. The results suggest that preferred ways of governing have emerged from historical-cultural regimes of practices used in the governing of FCMACS and from governing sport in general. The use of authority relying on technologies of power of the public order and safety regime is consistent with the perceived culture of FCMACS where hierarchy and authority prevails. Mediation and dialogue seem to be more congruent with ways of organising sports in general where federations need to deal with members of a federation and other (public) organisations to find and establish common forms of regulation. Also, the current willingness to collaborate probably reflects the desire for FCMACS to be seen and recognised as regular sports.

The discussion or fear of under-regulation and over-regulation can be considered as a discussion about what regime of practices becomes dominant or ‘the truth’ in regulation. The sport and economic regimes of practices are considered as practices of self-regulation while the public order and safety regime is unavoidably understood

135

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 135 Chapter 5

in the realm of government regulation. Practices of self-regulation applying technologies of power from the economic and sport regimes of practices were not as powerful and provided generous flexibility in governing. Pedersen et al. (2011, p. 379) argue that too much control, that is over-regulation, undermines the capacity and willingness to regulate the self while under-regulation reinforces fragmentation and hinders self-regulation. The results of the current study suggest that the last few decades of freedom in self-regulation (under-regulation) contributed to the fragmentation inside the FCMACS sector (see also Bottenburg and Heilbron 1996, 2006, Dortants and Bottenburg 2013). Regulation with coercion by an authority is therefore considered by stakeholders a key to reducing fragmentation and to enhancing the capacity of self-regulation.

The application of the concept of governmentality to the question of regulation of FCMACS shows that stakeholders suggest that authority can be created by recycling current technologies of power that other regimes use to govern. The results suggest that local and national governments can use existing coercive technologies of power, such as local legislation, to impose and sanction uniform regulations. Adhering to such legislations means self-regulation can work. And, if everyone needs to conform to the same rules for organising fight events then the corresponding costs are the same for anyone and any unfair competition is prevented. Besides coercion more subtle ways of governing are also needed. Pedersen et al. (2011) suggest that the management of self-regulation requires a combination of the technologies of power authority and dialogue or mediation to find the balance between under- and over-regulation.

As the concept of governmentality implies, this study is a situated analysis. The results provided context specific knowledge of a complex situation for governing FCMACS in the Netherlands. As explained previously, each country and sport has its own history, culture and practices of governing as well as legislation and financing resulting in specific mixes of regimes of practices that are relevant in regulation. However, the use of governmentality as an analytical frame enabled an in-depth understanding of the complex regulatory issue of the governing of FCMACS and may also be a useful analytical frame for the analysis of other regulatory issues in sport. The strengths of this analytical frame are threefold. Initially it gives insights providing a broad view on the current and possible future interplay of technologies power in governing sports. Consequently it transcends the more commonly used bipolar analysis of changes in the governing of sport and thereby provides a more complete picture on the increasing complexity and the ongoing strategic power plays in the governing of sport. The second added value of using this analytical frame is that it relates historically-culturally preferred ways of reasoning with

136

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 136 Regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports: How Governmentality as an Analytical Framework informs practices of the Governing of Sports.

specific technologies of power. Since changes in the governing of sports often means an increase in the number of regimes of practices, this analytical frame is able to disentangle various related ways of reasoning and governing. Dortants et al. (2016) show that such disentanglement makes discussion on issues, solutions and future governing clearer. The third benefit of this analytical framework is its ability to allow a researcher to describe the coexistence of consensus and ambiguity in a field of study. Given that this inconvenient dissonance could give a glimpse of new and alternative ways of governing sports, this framework may therefore also be of value in the analysis of current and future forms of joint governing of other sports since it can enhance the understanding of the complexity of joint forms of governing of sports.

Funding This research has been carried out in the framework of a research program financed by the Ministry of Public Health, Welfare and Sport, the Netherlands.

137

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 137 Chapter 5

References

Baker, J., Cobley, S., and Fraser-Thomas, J., 2009. What do we know about early sport specialization? Not much! High ability studies, 20 (1), 77–89. doi:10.1080/13598130902860507. Berg, B. K., and Chalip, L., 2013. Regulating the emerging: a policy discourse analysis of mixed martial arts legislation. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, (5) 1, 21-38. Bevir, M., and Rhodes, R., 2015. Mapping the field. In R. Rhodes, and M. Bevir, Routledge handbook of interpretive political science (pp. 3-28). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Bottenburg, M. v., and Heilbron, J., 1996. De verharding van het wedstrijdvechten. Onderzoek in opdracht van het ministerie van VWS. Amsterdam: Onderzoekbureau Diopter. Bottenburg, M. v., and Heilbron, J., 2006. De-sportization of fighting contests: The origins and dynamics of no holds barred events and the theory of sportization. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, (41), 259-282. Bröckling, U., Krasmann, S., and Lemke, T., 2011. From Foucault’s Lectures at the Collège de France to Studies of Governmentality: An Introduction. In U. Bröckling, S. Krasmann, T. Lemke, U. Bröckling, S. Krasmann, and T. Lemke (Red.), Governmentality. Current issues and future chalanges (pp. 1-34). New York: Routledge. Capranica, L. and Millard-Stafford, M.L., 2011. Youth Sport Specialization: How to Manage Competition and Training?. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 6(4), pp. 572-579. Chaker, A.-N., 2004. Good governance in sport. A European survey. Strasbourg : Council of Europe Publishing. Chalip, L., 2006. Toward a Distinctive Sport Management Discipline. Journal of Sport Management, Volume 20, pp. 1-21. Dean, M., 2010. Governmentality. Power and rule in modern society (second edition 2010 ed.). London: Sage Publications Ltd. Dortants, M., and Knoppers, A., 2013. Regulation of diversity through discipline: Practices of inclusion and exclusion in boxing. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, (48) 535-549. Dortants, M., and Bottenburg, M. v., 2013. Aanzien en overleven in een sport vol passie. Over regulering van full-contact vechtsporten [Respect and survive in a sport full of passion. Regulation of full contact martial arts]. Nieuwegein: Arko Sports Media. Dortants, M., Knoppers, A., and Bottenburg, M. v., 2016. Challenges in regulating full contact martial arts and combat sports in the Netherlands. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 8(3), 473- 490. Elling, A. and Wisse, E., 2010. Beloften van Vechtsport. [Promises of combat sports]. Niewegein: Arko Sports media. Fahlén, J., Eliasson, I., and Wickman, K., 2015. Resisting self-regulation: an analysis of sport policy programme making and implementation in Sweden. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 7(3), 391-406. Gammelsæter, H., 2010. Institutional Pluralism and Governance in “Commercialized” Sport Clubs. European Sport Management Quarterly, 10(5), pp. 569-594. Geeraert, A., Alm, J., and Grolle, M., 2014. Good governance in international sport organisations: an analysis of the 35 Olympic sport governing bodies. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 6(3), 281–306. Green, M., and Houlihan, B., 2006. Governmentality, modernization, and the “disciplining” of national sporting organizations: Athletics in Australia and the United Kingdom. Sociology of Sport Journal, 23(1), 47-71.

138

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 138 Regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports: How Governmentality as an Analytical Framework informs practices of the Governing of Sports.

Grix, J. and Brannagan, P. M., 2016. Of Mechanisms and Myths: Conceptualising States’ “Soft Power” Strategies through Sports Mega-Events. Diplomacy & Statecraft, 27(2), pp. 251-272. Hoekman, R., Elling, A., and Van der Roest, J.-W., 2011. meedoen alle jeugd door sport: georganiseerde sport bewijst zich. Brussel: Demos. Opgehaald van https://www.kennisbanksportenbewegen. nl/?file=1744&m=1422882931&action=file.downl Houlihan, B. and Green, M., 2009. Modernization and sport: the reform of Sport England and UK sport.. Public Administration, 87(3), p. 678–698. Kamerman, Sheila, 2011. Gemeente leert boefjes meppen. [Municipality learns to hit petty criminals] NRC Handelsblad, Binnenland; p. 8. 05 August.oad Malina, R. M., 2010. Early Sport Specialization: Roots, Effectiveness, Risks.Current Sports Medicine Reports, 9(6), pp. 364-371. Martin, J., 2002. Organisation culture. Mapping the terrain. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Miller, P., and Rose, N., 2008. Governing the present. Administering economic, social and personal life. Cambridge: Polity Press. Nagel, S., Schlesinger, T., Baylec, E., and Giauqued, D., 2015. Professionalisation of sport federations – a multi-level framework for analysing forms, causes and consequences. European Sport Management Quarterly, 15(4), 407-433. Pedersen, A. R., Sehested, K., and Sørensen, E., 2011. Emerging theoretical understanding of pluricentric coordination in public governance. The American Review of Public Administration, 41(4), 375- 394. Phillpots, L., Grix, J., and Quarmby, T., 2010. Centralized grassroots sport policy and ‘new governance’: A case study of County Sports Partnerships in the UK –unpacking the paradox. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 46(3), 265–281. Rana, J., 2014. Producing Healthy Citizens: Encouraging Participation in Ladies-Only Kickboxing. Etnofoor, 26(2), pp. 33-48. Sam, M. P., 2009. The public management of sport. Public management review, 11(4), pp. 499-514. Shilbury, D., and Ferkins, L., 2015. Exploring the Utility of Collaborative Governance in a National Sport Organization. Journal of Sport Management, 29(4), 380-397. Shilbury, D., O’Boyle, I., and Ferkins, L., 2016. Towards a research agenda in collaborative sport governance. Sport Management review, 19, 479-491. Siekmann, R., and Soek, J., 2010. Models of sport governance in the European union: the relationship between state and sport authorities. The international sports articles law journal, 93-102. Stenling, C., and Fahlén, J., 2009. The order of logics in Swedish sport – feeding the hungry beast of result orientation and commercialization. European Journal for Sport and Society, 6(2), 121-134. Theeboom, M., 2012. A closer look at effects of martial arts involvement among youth. International Journal of Sport Management and Marketing, 11(3/4), pp. 193-205. Vertonghen, J. and Theeboom, M., 2010. The social-psychological outcomes of martial arts practise among youth: A review. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, Volume 9, pp. 528-537. Vugts, P., 2010. Van der Laan wil freefightgala’s uit Amsterdam verbannen. [Van der Laan wants to ban free fight gala in Amsterdam] Het Parool, 04 September 2010. Walters, W., 2012. Governmentality. Critical Encounters. Oxon: Routledge. Woolf, J., Berg, B. K., Newland, B. L. and Green, B. C., 2016. So You Want to be a Fighter? Institutional Work and Sport Development Processes at an Elite Mixed Martial Arts Gym. Journal of Sport Management, Volume 30, pp. 438 -452.

139

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 139 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 140 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 141 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 142 6 Discussion: Changing mixtures of regimes of practices transforming sport (self) regulation

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 143 Chapter 6

Introduction

This doctoral study began with my attempt to understand the practices governing diversity in a local boxing gym and was followed by an investigation into the processes of regulating Full Contact Martial Arts and Combat Sports (FCMACS) at the national level. Both case studies gave glimpses into the world of FCMACS and provided insights into how contextual changes can impact the routine practices of managing, controlling or the governing of sport. I also show how various ‘truths’ about FCMACS and corresponding power relations are challenged. Both studies are about competitive FCMACS that claim to have a disciplinary culture but also have unique characteristics. The first case study focuses on boxing practices that function in a regulated sport structure, with a clear set of rules at national and international levels. The second case study is about a group of FCMACS that are haphazardly regulated at national and international levels. These fragmented and loosely organized FCMACS, led by a plurality of federations, can be considered as ‘fuzzy’ self-regulated sports.

My research was motivated by a desire to understand the impact that various challenges and changes had on the governing of FCMACS. My focus in the local gym was on how adaptations to a ‘truth’ about boxing were locally managed. I explored how trainers disciplined boxers to normalize a new ‘truth’ about boxing resulting in the full participation of female boxers. Interference to the self-governing FCMACS by local and national governments resulted in a blurring of the traditional lines between sport and the government (Misener & Misener, 2017). The implementation of governmental policy goals through local gyms and the ban of large fight events led to a confusing mix of ‘truths’ and ways of governing. The ‘cacophony of truths’ that arose and the variety of ways of governing led to the ‘dialogues of deaf’ and a power vacuum in the governing of FCMACS at the national level. I investigated how the deadlock in governing that had arisen could be broken and how collaborative governing could be established.

The purpose of this study was also to explore a processual approach to power and to allow insights into how social political changes interfere in the governing of sport. By exploring a Foucauldian analytic framework in both case studies I intended to contribute to and improve the understanding of complex issues in the governing of sport. More specifically, a Foucauldian inspired analytical framework enabled me to investigate the strategic power plays of negotiations of historical-cultural forms of knowledge or ‘truths’ and related technologies of power. Foucault’s work on discipline and governmentality formed the basis of my theoretical framework and his theoretical concepts were further extended into an analytical framework with

144

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 144 Discussion: Changing mixtures of regimes of practices transforming sport (self) regulation

the use of work of of Bröckling, Krasmann, and Lemke (2011), Dean (2010), Miller and Rose (2008) and Walters (2012). Their work expanded on the interrelationship of power and ‘truth’ and allowed me to develop a more dynamic power sensitive approach to study changes in the governing of sport in this dissertation.

Research questions

The results of each of the case studies are summarized and discussed in the following section. The overall findings of this study followed by their contributions to studies of the governing of sport in general and specifically to governing diversity and FCMACS are found from page 146 of this chapter. A critical reflection on the results, strengths and limitations of this study as a whole appear under the heading ‘Critical reflection on both studies’ on page 154 and is followed by concluding remarks.

145

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 145 Chapter 6

Results of the two case studies

Case study one: Practices of the governing of diversity in the gym. The case study of the gym showed how historical-cultural ways of governing disciplined young boxers during practice sessions to become successful boxers. Disciplinary technologies of power were used to normalize full participation of female boxers in the gym during practice sessions. The results also indicated that, simultaneously in another part of the gym, outside of the practice sessions, other technologies of power were used to govern this new ‘truth’ about boxing more smoothly, more sympathetically and somewhat secretively.

1. How do self-regulating practices normalize female boxers as ‘true’ boxers in the gym?

The newly constructed diversity or ‘truth’ about boxing as being a sport for both men and women was governed by existing historical-cultural ways of governing. Disciplinary technologies of power are part of the language, culture and daily routines of boxing during practice sessions. The dominance and acceptance of the use of these technologies of power enabled trainers to make their construction of the (new) ‘truth’ about boxing where full participation of female boxers was normalized, or dominant. The application of these technologies was accompanied by negotiations outside of practice sessions which seem to be part of the way trainers coach boxers in a more personal way. In that context trainers, and boxers tried to persuade or convince each other to make their own truth about boxing dominant, all trying to secure their own preferred outcomes. Since not all male boxers favoured the full participation of women, trainers used these backstage discussions and negotiations to keep these male boxers from leaving the gym. Trainers needed to compromise to preserve as many members as possible in their gym, especially those who were talented and could become (inter)national champions in the future. Consequently, this ‘truth’ about boxing turned out to be ambiguous and controversial. Although women have become full participants in this gym, their presence contributed to the ambiguity due to the conflicting interests. Historically-culturally determined technologies of power were therefore used in different places in the gym to make a specific ‘truth’ and related categorizations about boxing dominant for the governing of diversity towards securing various preferred outcomes.

146

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 146 Discussion: Changing mixtures of regimes of practices transforming sport (self) regulation

2. How can the full participation of female boxers in the gym be understood from a Foucauldian analytical framework?

This situated analysis of practices of the governing of diversity using a Foucauldian framework showed that the full participation of female boxers was governed with the use of context appropriate technologies of power. The use of disciplinary technologies (Foucault, 1995) seemed to work in the context of the limited space and time of a practice session. In this specifically defined space individuals are arranged in such way that each individual can be monitored and corrected and, if necessary, penalized if he or she does not comply with the orders or rules. These protected places are able to control the activities of boxers by structuring practice sessions to have all boxers do the same exercises at the same time, rhythm, or cadence. Doing the same activities at the same time facilitates the discipline of boxers. Rigorous disciplining and programming by a trainer constructs a ‘true boxer’, and allows the trainer, as an authority to decide what the ‘truth’ about a boxer is and what the boxer ought to do.

The power plays in different places in the gym were analyzed using the concept of governmentality as analytical framework. Each location seemed to have its own routine practices of governing with preferred technologies of power. Trainers seem to be dominant in making their truth while leading the gym, but boxers also turned out to be an agent in this power play of reconstructions of truths about boxing outside practice sessions. The use of the concept governmentality as analytical framework revealed that, although women became full participants and thereby became ‘true’ boxers in the sense of becoming ’disciplined’ athletes, the gender of a ‘true’ boxer remained ambiguous and was not completely clarified.

3. What can organizations learn from practices governing diversity in boxing?

The study showed that governing through the use of situated historical-cultural technologies of power led to a new truth about boxing. Negotiation and persuasion in combination with authoritarian control during practice sessions were related to ambition in determining the definition of the trainer of a ‘real’ and successful boxer. An important finding was that although that full participation of women became normalised, ambiguous meanings about boxing remained. However, this ambiguity did not hinder the full participation of women, but showed that new truths about sports and related categorizations continue to be negotiated.

147

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 147 Chapter 6

Case study 2: Challenges to the governing of FCMACS at national level. The results of the second case study showed that an increased, often ad hoc, involvement of governmental organizations in the governing of FCMACS led to a need to reconsider current truths and ways of governing these sports. Regulation of FCMACS turned out to be a complex issue because different stakeholders with various truths and related routine ways of governing became intermingled in the debates of the future governing of these sports. The disentanglement of various regimes of practices made the discussion about problems in governing more clear and revealed agreement on specific issues and a mix of strategies of governing that could lead towards a first step in regulating these sports in this new context.

4. What motivations affect decisions stakeholders make about adjustments to the governing of FCMACS and what might be important about these for the future governing of these sports?

Before the interference of governmental organisations, stakeholders reasoning about the governing of FCMACS were mainly motivated by economic and sport regimes of practices. After local governments banned several large fight events and implemented policy goals through FCMACS, a public order and safety regime of practices also became relevant in the way stakeholders reasoned about the governing of these sports. The case study showed that the reasoning about problems pointed to agreement on two issues that needed to be solved. Although the differences between regimes of practices co-exist, there was more or less a consensus in reasoning to proceed with limited restrictions of FCMACS and increased recognition of the value of FCMACS for our society. The data also suggest agreement on the use of a mix of technologies of power to govern. Authoritarian leadership is expected from local and national governments in future governing. Here the uses of technologies of power that are congruent with the public order and safety regime of practices seem to be appropriate in future governing of these sports. At the same time various stakeholders suggest that future governing requires consultation and mediation to deal with existing contradictions inherent in the various regimes of practices in governing. Findings suggest that a combination of both authoritative and mediating forms of governing is needed to move forward towards regulated self-regulation, also to secure preferred outcomes of stakeholders. Here a balance between freedom and coercion and between under- and overregulation of these sports must be found.

148

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 148 Discussion: Changing mixtures of regimes of practices transforming sport (self) regulation

5. How can the current impasse in the governing of FCMACS in the Netherlands be understood from a Foucauldian analytical framework and how does it inform the future governing of these sports?

The concept of governmentality as analytical framework was used to analyse the complexity of the regulation of FCMACS. It revealed that each regime of practices shaped specific constructions of the problems in the governing of FCMACS. It showed that since the public order and safety regime of practices became relevant in governing the regulation of FCMACS, the governing of these sports became ad hoc and fragmented. This was due to what I call ‘dialogues of the deaf’ and a ‘power vacuum’ due to the failure of existing technologies of power to regulate these sports in the current context. The concept of governmentality as analytical framework revealed an overlap in regimes of practices. These overlaps showed the ‘borrowings’ from the three relevant regimes of practices as a starting point for future governing. This case study made clear that issues of regulation of sports at a national level need in-depth insight into the interference of existing regimes of practices. And although there is agreement, ambiguity still co-exists. Insights into the possible interaction or interplay of conducts and counter conduct of various stakeholders in regulation might be informative for the organization of future governing FCMACS.

6. What can others, such as policy makers and researchers/scholars in the Netherlands and elsewhere, learn from Dutch efforts to regulate FCMACS? FCMACS are a specific group of highly commercialized and fragmented sports that are organized differently than conventional sports and whose legitimacy is questioned more often than that of other sports. The combination of the weak, unconventional organization of these sports with a continued search for profit and an unending questioning of their legitimacy seem to make FCMACS particularly vulnerable to critical questions in times of change. The involvement of other than the usual stakeholders in the governing of FCMACS results in other ‘truths’ and ways of governing becoming relevant and new mixes of regimes of practices emerging. Although these mixes appear to be full of contradictions, the findings of my study suggest that ‘borrowings’ across regimes are beneficial seemingly creating opportunities for consensus to emerge on certain issues. Agreement on specific issues, such as the need for safety through restrictions in this case study, could serve as a starting point for solving the most urgent problems in the governing of these, but probably also in other sports. The issues that need to be solved could be governed by the use of a specific mix of rationalities and existing related technologies of power. This Foucauldian approach could possibly be useful and applied in other efforts for in the governing of sports, for example in tackling

149

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 149 Chapter 6

match fixing that requires intersectional collaboration to be successful. The findings suggest that a critical analysis of current governing can inform how situated specific ‘truths’ that are related to preferred ways of governing, could be adjusted to meet the challenges that sport organizations face at this time.

General findings

The findings of both studies suggest that changes in a context make ‘truths’ and routines of governing fluid, negotiable and adaptable. If the situation changes and more or other kinds of practitioners or stakeholders become involved in governing, the number of regimes of practices increases. This results in negotiations about the creation of a new mix of ‘truths’ that can be governed by using existing preferred technologies of power. Both studies show that changes in a context stimulate the reconsideration of ‘truths’ or what is considered as normal and appropriate in practices of the governing of FCMACS. The preferred technologies of power that circulated in a gym played an important role in the governing of diversity such as the inclusion of female boxers. The case study of regulation of FCMACS at the national level showed that a new mix of recycled preferred technologies of power could be applied to meet contemporary requirements in the governing of FCMACS. Both studies showed that a combination of an authoritative and mediating form of governing is required to meet social-political challenges.

These insights could be achieved by using a Foucauldian inspired analytical framework. The concepts of discipline and governmentality as analytical framework enabled me to study the interrelationship between rationalities and technologies of power and to study the dynamics of the strategic power plays in governing FCMACS. This combination of rationalities and technologies turned out to be more informative than an independent study of rationalities and technologies as used in most studies of the governing of sport. A specific way of reasoning turned out to be in line with specific technologies of power and therefore relevant and informative for discussions on future governing. Foucault’s concepts also enabled me to study the layered situated strategic power games of conduct and counter- conduct by their focus on various spaces in an organization that revealed preferred

150

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 150 Discussion: Changing mixtures of regimes of practices transforming sport (self) regulation

technologies of power. And although not mentioned as such in the literature, the inventory and disentanglement of various taken for granted assumptions or ‘truths’ in constructions of issues to be solved, gave insight into the overlaps or ‘borrowings’ in ways of reasoning as a starting point to tackle these issues. The findings of this dissertation and the Foucauldian analytical framework could be a step to contribute to what Misener & Misener (2017) suggest as a further theorization around plurality and hybridism in the governing of sports.

The use of the concept of governmentality in the case study about the effort for the governing of FCMACS revealed possibilities for doing things differently by identifying agreement on specific issues to be solved and preferred technologies of power. The focus on an in-depth understanding of various interests through the studying of the history of current rationalities also enabled me to understand what could be at stake and its consequences for future governing of these sports. Finally, the use of these concepts enabled me to reflect critically on the simultaneous presence of coercion and freedom of (self) governing. This allowed me to sidestep the bipolar or oppositional analysis of power relations in the governing of sport. Analyzing power from a framework that considers power as circuits of power, multi centred and as consisting of negotiations of a multiplicity of interrelated rationalities and technologies of power deepened my understanding of the process of the governing of sports and how it can probably be changed.

Contribution to research on governing sports Using the Foucauldian approach in the two case studies contributed to an in- depth understanding of the complexity of governing sport. Besides gaining insight into various rationalities, the concept also provided me with an understanding of preferred ways of governing. Additionally, the use of the concept of governmentality makes a much broader analysis of the plays of power possible in changing circumstances. It provides insight into the various technologies of power that are congruent with relevant regimes of practices and the use of these technologies that are part of these power games. This allows the countervailing power and resistance that is triggered by attempts to govern to become visible. The unmasking of various technologies of power that are appropriate to a specific situation, enabled the evaluation of future forms of governing sports. At a time when many changes are affecting the governing of sports, including those in the balance between authority and freedom, the concept of governmentality could provide a concise framework for analysis, especially on technologies of power. Its use also might contribute to a further development of research on forms of joint governing of sports.

To summarize, the Foucauldian analytical framework facilitates insights into

151

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 151 Chapter 6

how technologies of power work, and probably could work in governing sports. Transcending the more commonly used bipolar analysis of change in the governing of sport, it relates historically-culturally preferred ways of reasoning with specific technologies of power and reveals the co-existence of consensus and ambiguity. This framework work may therefore be of value in the analysis of current and future forms of joint governing of other sports since it can enhance the understanding of the complexity of joint forms of governing sport.

Contributions to research on diversity Research on the governing of diversity in recent years has mainly focussed on structural inequalities from a critical perspective and on what is called a ‘business case’ perspective. The research of Zanoni, Janssens, Benschop, & Nkomo (2010) and Ahonen, Tienari, Meriläinen, & Pullen (2014) deals with organizational diversity and investigates new directions to increase the understanding of the ‘dynamics of power and diversity in organizations’ (p.17). According to these scholars, this requires more empirical research of diversity in organizational settings and especially on how inclusiveness is achieved. Besides revealing how power structures hinder the inclusion of new groups of organization members, this study shows how traditional power structures enable inclusion of new groups. Also, the use of a governmentality analytical framework highlights agency. This agency perspective could also be effective in focussing on how power structures prevent or enable the inclusion of new groups of organizational members. For example, the case study of the gym showed that although structural inequalities existed, the agency of trainers and boxers was needed to negotiate and change structures that previously prevented women from becoming full participants. This case study suggests that forms of dominance were as important in the acceptance of full participation in the gym as the negotiations and persuasions outside of the practice sessions. The concepts of discipline and governmentality as analytical framework enabled a situated analysis of play of forces where conduct and counter-conduct was exercised to critique taken for granted assumptions about boxing. Ahonen et al. argue that the majority of studies fail to give insight into how specific contexts matters in terms of power relations that inform which differences are constituted and shape inclusion. However the use of this analytical framework can reveal what Ahonen et al (2014) call the multiplicity and fluidity of differences in a specific context. By applying a Foucauldian analytical framework to the specific context of a gym, I intend to contribute to what Ahonen et al call ‘revitalize the field of diversity research’ and to pay more attention to dynamics of power, also important according to Zanoni et al. In order to arrive at an understanding of how inclusiveness was achieved, I combined the use of context and specific situated power relations with negotiations in strategic power games about ‘truths’ in my analysis.

152

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 152 Discussion: Changing mixtures of regimes of practices transforming sport (self) regulation

Contribution to research on FCMACS The controversy and dispute frequently surrounding FCMACS makes the ways in which these sports are governed more problematic than other sports. Yet relatively little research has examined the governing of FCMACS, for example, Channon and Jennings (2014) in their review of empirical research in martial arts and combat sports do not mention the paucity of research on the governing of these sports. Perhaps the research described in this dissertation will stimulate others to take on this challenge. The controversy and dispute swirling around FCMACS and its governance often stem from specific moral-ethical norms about what is or should be considered as ‘normal’ and/or acceptable in our society. Since the use of the concept of governmentality requires an analysis of what are considered to be ’truths’, its use results in an overview of such ‘truths’. Truths are by definition normative (Foucault , 2011). Consequently, the analysis using the concept of governmentality as an analytical framework considers various viewpoints that could direct future governing. The presentation and discussions about the results of the case study where different normative viewpoints are highlighted could inform discussions on the use and conditions of regulation in a more structured way. Further, I suggest that the use of governmentality enabled me to give voice to a plurality of stakeholders to understand the dynamics of procedures of the governing of FCMACS. Those stakeholders may be not familiar with each other’s ways of reasoning and governing. The use of the concept of governmentality provided insight into different ways of reasoning and interests of stakeholders involved in the governing of FCMACS. Finally, the use of the concept of governmentality can reveal alternative ways of governing that do justice to the specific nature of the sports involved.

Social-political issues in FCMACS could be addressed through trajectories of collaborate governing starting with revealing and discussing about what is considered important and ‘normal’ in governing. The results of the studies in this dissertation suggest that the use of governmental regulation as occurs in some countries could be replaced by a search for a joint manner of governing specific issues. Here an in-depth understanding of existing regimes of practices could be a first step towards joint governing.

153

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 153 Chapter 6

Critical reflection on both studies

I acknowledge that research makes ‘individuals knowable, divisional performances comparable, and organizations governable’ (McKinley & Starkey, 2000, p. 6). By showing glimpses of FCMACS, I made these sports visible and thereby perhaps more vulnerable to the interventions of outsiders. If FCMACS are understood better, then the control of these sports by others may become easier. This phenomenon is called the paradox of knowing. However, the glimpses I provided were not clear cut, inviting immediate intervention. They also revealed ambiguity and gave voice to all stakeholders as participants of the strategic power play of governing FCMACS. Logically, defining, even describing ambiguity is a challenge; it is easier to present a single point of view or a well-structured unambiguous way of reasoning. However, I suggest that the ambiguity emerging in research studies should be included in the presentation of research results since it could suggest alternative or new ways of governing (Dean, 2010). The studies revealed that the existence and presentation of ambiguity in reasoning may allow stakeholders to borrow from other regimes of practices and result in the emergence of alternative ways of governing and/or of addressing issues. As is shown in this dissertation ambiguity made borrowings of regimes of practices possible and thus new ways to govern diversity were found and a first step was taken in solving issues in FCMACS. Without ambiguity, there seems to be less space to bridge differences in ways of reasoning. Drawing on ambiguity in the research of the governing of sport might also be helpful in finding forms of joint governing. Consequently I suggest that ambiguity deserves to be presented in studies because it could lead to new or alternative ways of governing. Although a critical researcher would challenge the reproduction of structures of power in the gym, I did not question the leadership of the trainer. In this study I was focussed on how practices of governing worked in the inclusion in new groups in organizations and I avoided challenging dominant power structures that prioritized membership. Although their role is powerful and they run the gym using strict disciplinary techniques, trainers cannot operate without impunity. However, the acceptance and normalcy of the trainer’s dominance during practice sessions could be the subject of a further critical investigation of practices in the gym.

I also did not explore the role of power relations and the ways gender and ethnicity interact in the governing of sports at a national level. This should be a topic for future research because these sports are practiced and governed by an (ethnically) diverse group of men and, while the number of women involved is increasing, women are still underrepresented in the governing of these sports. Studies of Claringbould and Knoppers (2013) and Rao & Tilt (2016) have shown that gender and ethnicity are

154

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 154 Discussion: Changing mixtures of regimes of practices transforming sport (self) regulation

embedded in practices of governing sports. Therefore it is important to investigate how female and ethnic diverse managers could be involved more in the governing of these sports.

The role of researcher as outsider, discussed in Chapter one, could be seen as compromising the trustworthiness of my study. However, being an outsider, without a prior interest and history may have helped me to produce a balanced analysis in both studies. Specific outcomes of a qualitative study are usually context specific (Robson, 2011) although insights from both case studies may be transferable to other contexts (Symon & Cassell, 2012). Other research in martial arts and combat sports e.g. Lafferty & McKay (2004), Woodward (2004), Paradis (2012), Channon A. G. (2013) show similarities between the study of this specific gym in ways of reasoning and governing with the use of hierarchy and the authority of a trainer in a gym. The results of this study made clear that the use of the concept of governmentality as analytical framework enabled the analysis of rationalities that are related to preferred technologies of power. Further research into how sport organizations deal with complex and demanding environments (Misener & Misener, 2017; Paradis, 2012) could profit from using this theoretical framework. Its use can enable researchers to unravel complexities of contemporary governing of sport. Since this analytical framework provides alternative ways of thinking about governing, the results of its use could support stakeholders including policy makers in finding solutions to what are often called ‘wicked problems’ and to plan the re-organization of the governing including finding new forms of collaborative governing in sport. It use may point to new mixes of regimes of practices opening windows for a hybrid of rationalities and technologies of power in the governing of contemporary complex issues in sport (Svensson & Seifried, 2017). However, little is known about how new mixtures of regimes of practices might work in future governing. Also this dissertation is limited on this point. This path of research into how mixes of regimes of practices might work could add some further insights to the approach taken by Dean (2010). For example, little is known about ways to analyse interactions between conflicting regimes of practices and how they inform future collaborative governing. Results of research into the strategic power games between different regimes of power might inform and support critical thinking about current and future governing of sport.

155

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 155 Chapter 6

Concluding remarks

The purpose of both case studies was to use a dynamic power sensitive approach to gain insight into how social political changes interfere in the governing of FCMACS and how stakeholders deal with these challenges. The studies used in this dissertation indicate that even if the power balance seems to be unequal, the seemingly most powerful actor needs to negotiate with those that seem less powerful, simply because cooperation is of paramount importance in dealing with current issues in the governing of sport. Since negotiation is a given in most governance settings, resistance to governing by trainers/managers or others can be seen as part of the strategic game of governing sports in times of change.

156

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 156 Discussion: Changing mixtures of regimes of practices transforming sport (self) regulation

References chapter 1 and 6

Ahonen, P., Tienari, J., Meriläinen, S., & Pullen, A. (2014). Hidden contexts and invisible power relations: a Foucauldian reading of diversity research. Human Realtions, 67(3), 263-286. Berg, B. K., & Chalip, L. (2013). Regulating the emerging: a policy discourse analysis of mixed martial arts legislation. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics vol 5, No. 1, 21-38. Bevir, M., & Rhodes, R. (2015). Mapping the field. In R. Rhodes, & M. Bevir,Routledge handbook of interpretive political science (pp. 3-28). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Bottenburg, M. v., & Heilbron, J. (2006). De-sportization of fighting contests: The origins and dynamics of no holds barred events and the theory of sportization. International Review for the Sociology of Sport 2006 41, 259-282. Bröckling, U., Krasmann, S., & Lemke, T. (2011). From Foucaults Lectures at the Collège de France to Studies of Governmentality: An Introduction. In U. Bröckling, S. Krasmann, T. Lemke, U. Bröckling, S. Krasmann, & T. Lemke (Red.), Governmentality. Current issues and future chalanges (pp. 1-34). New York: Routledge. Bruyninckx, H. (2012). Sport governance. Between the obsession with rules and regulation and the aversion to being ruled and regulated. In B. Segaert, M. Theeboom, C. Timmerman, & B. Vanreusel, Sports governance, development and corporate responsability (pp. 107-121). New York: Routledge. Buchanan, D. & Badham, R., 2000. Power, politics, and organizational change. Winning the turf game. London: Sage Publications Ltd. Channon, A. G. (2013). Enter the discourse: exploring the discursive roots of inclusivity in mixed-sex martial arts. Sport in Society, 16(10), 1293–1308. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17430437.20 13.790896 Claringbould, I., & Knoppers, A. (2013). Understanding the lack of gender equity in leadership positions in (sport) organization. In P. Leisink, P. Boselie, M. Van Bottenburg, & D. M. Hosking, Managing Social Issues: A Public Values Perspective (pp. 162-182). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. Clegg, S. R., Courpasson, D., & Phillips, N. (2006). Power and organizations. London: Sage Publications Ltd. Dean, M. (2010). Governmentality. Power and rule in modern society (second edition 2010 ed.). London: Sage Publications Ltd. Dortants, M., & Knoppers, A. (2016). The organization of diversity in a boxing club: Governmentality and entangled rationalities. Culture and Organization, 22(3), 245-261. Foucault, M. (1995). Discipline and punish. The birth of the prison. (A. Sheridan, Vert.) New York: Random House. Foucault, M. (2011). The courage of truth. The government of self and others II. Lectures at theCollege de France 1983-1984. (F. Gros, Red., & G. Burchel, Vert.) Palgrave Macmillan. Gammelsæter, H. (2010). Institutional Pluralism and Governance in Commercialized Sport Clubs. European Sport Management Quarterly, 10(5), 569-594. doi:10.1080/16184742.2010.524241 Gems, G., & Pfister, G. (2014). Women Boxers: Actresses to Athletes – The Role of Vaudeville in Early Women’s Boxing in the USA. The International Journal of the History of Sport, 31(15), pp. 1909–1924. Green, M., & Houlihan, B. (2006). Governmentality, modernization, and the ‘disciplining ‘of National Sport Organsiations: Athletics in Australia and the United Kingdom. Sociology of Sport Journal, 23(1), 47-71. Lafferty, Y., & McKay, J. (2004). Suffragettes in satin shorts? Gender and competative boxing. Qualitative Sociology, 27, 249-276.

157

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 157 Chapter 6

Lemke, T. (2002). Foucault, Governmentality, and Critique. Rethinking Marxism: A Journal of Economics, Culture & Society, 14(3), 49-64. Martínková, I., & Parry, J. (2016). Martial Categories: Clarification and Classification.Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 43(1), 143-162,. doi:10.1080/00948705.2015.1038829 Mennesson, C. (2000). ‘Hard’ women and ‘soft’ women. The social constructions of identity among female boxers. International Review for Sociology of Sport, 35, 21-33. Misener, K., & Misener, L. (2017). Grey is the new black: advancing understanding of new organizational forms and blurring sector bounderies in sport management. Journal of Sport Management, 31, 125-132. Nagel, S., Schlesinger, T., Baylec, E., & Giauqued, D. (2015). Professionalisation of sport federations – a multi-level framework for analysing forms, causes and consequences. European Sport Management Quarterly, 15(4), 407-433. doi:10.1080/16184742.2015.1062990 Paradis, E. (2012). Boxers, Briefs or Bras? Bodies, Gender and Change in the Boxing Gym. Body & Society, 18(2), 82–109. Rana, J. (2014). Producing Healthy Citizens: Encouraging Participation in Ladies-Only Kickboxing. Etnofoor, 26(2), 33-48. Opgehaald van http://www.jstor.org/stable/43264058 Rao, K., & Tilt, C. (2016). Board composition and corporate social responsibility: The role of diversity, gender, strategy and decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, 138(2), 327–347. doi:DOI 10.1007/s10551-015-2613-5 Robson, C. (2011). Real world research (third ed.). Chichester: Wiley. Sánchez García, R. & Malcolm, D., 2010. Decivilizing, civilizing or informalizing? The international development of Mixed Martial Arts. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 45(1), p. 39–58. Sánchez Garcia, R., & Spencer, D. C. (2014). Intoduction Fighting Scholars. Habitus and ethnographies of Martial arts and combat sports. In R. Sánchez Garcia, & D. C. Spencer, Fighting Scholars. Habitus and ethnographies of Martial arts and combat sports (pp. 1-19). London: Anthem Press. Shilbury, D., O’Boyle, I., & Ferkins, L. (2016). Towards a research agenda in collaborate sport governancen. Sport Management review, 19, 479-491. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2016.04.004 Spencer, D. C. (2012). Ultimate Fighting and embodiment. Violence, Gender and Mixed Martial Arts. NewYork: Routledge. Svensson, P., & Seifried, C. (2017). Navigating Plurality in Hybrid Organizing: The Case of Sport for Development and Peace Entrepreneurs. Journal of Sport Management, 31, 176. Symon, G., & Cassell, C. (2012). Qualitative Organizations research. Core methods and current challenges. London: Sage Publications Ltd. Van Kleef, R. (2014). The legal status of disciplinary regulations in sport. International Sports Law Journal, 14, 24–45. doi:DOI 10.1007/s40318-013-0035-z Wacquant, L. (2004). Body and soul. Notebooks of an apprentice boxer. new York: Oxford University Press. Walters, W. (2012). Governmentality. Critical Encounters. Oxon: Routledge. Woodward, K. (2004). Rumble in the jungle; Boxing, racialization and the performance of masculinity. Leisure studies, 23/1, 5-17. Woodward, K. (2008). Hanging out and hanging about. Insider/outsider research in the sport of boxing. ethnography, 9(4), 536–561. Woodward, K. (2014). Legacies of 2012: Putting women’s boxing into discourse. Contemporary Social Science, 9, pp. 242-252. Zanoni, P., Janssens, M., Benschop, Y., & Nkomo, S. (2010). Unpacking diversity, grasping inequality: rethinking difference trough critical perspectives. Organization, 17(1), 9-29.

158

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 158 Discussion: Changing mixtures of regimes of practices transforming sport (self) regulation

159

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 159 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 160 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 161 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 162 Samenvatting (Summary in Dutch) Dankwoord (Acknowledgements in Dutch) Curriculum Vitae

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 163 Samenvatting (Summary in Dutch)

Ooit in een boks- of kickboksschool geweest en met enige verbazing staan kijken naar een zeer diverse groep jongeren die uiterst geconcentreerd en gedisciplineerd samen traint en spart? Of ooit aanwezig geweest bij zo’n spectaculair vechtsportgala, waar kickboksers met opzwepende muziek en onder gejuich van hun fans naar de ring lopen om het gevecht aan te gaan? Zoals velen om me heen zou ik tot ongeveer 10 jaar geleden ontkennend hebben geantwoord, nee, niet echt sporten voor mij. Echter, vechtsporters en hun trainers dwingen respect af, en vechtsporten blijken intrigerende en interessante sporten om te bestuderen. Ze zijn complex georganiseerd en roepen tegenstrijdige emoties op. Vechtsporten worden met veel passie beoefend en in de gym vinden jongeren structuur en motivatie om zich te committeren en te verbinden aan een sport en elkaar. Daarmee hervinden ze vaak zelfvertrouwen en krijgen aanzien in hun directe omgeving (Anthonissen & Dortants, 2006; Elling & Wisse, 2010). Tegelijkertijd zijn het sporten met rafelranden vanwege de aard en het imago van de sport. Misschien komt dat door de aantrekkingskracht van deze sporten voor een specifieke groep beoefenaars of vanwege een meegedragen historie waarbij aangeschuurd wordt tegen de donkere kanten van onze samenleving.

Al deze ‘waarheden’ over vechtsporten zijn op een of andere manier aannemelijk. Ze zijn in ieder geval alle relevant bij het organiseren en reguleren van deze sporten, zowel in de vechtsportschool zelf als op nationaal en internationaal niveau. Dat maakt het een interessant en relevant fenomeen om te onderzoeken. En, misschien is uit deze onverwachte hoek ook wel iets te leren over het organiseren en de sturing van andere organisaties, binnen en buiten de sport.

Als mens en wetenschapper ben ik de afgelopen tien jaar gegrepen door de verhalen en praktijken in en over vechtsporten. Met een verwonderde en nieuwsgierige blik onderzocht ik de vechtsporten. Het doel was inzicht te krijgen in hoe deze sporten georganiseerd en gereguleerd zijn en hoe ze meebewegen en dealen met de sociaal-politieke veranderingen die ook op deze sporten afkomen. Veranderingen zoals een meer divers wordende populatie in de gyms en de druk om aan de kwaliteitseisen van de overheid te voldoen. Het managen en hanteerbaar maken van dergelijke opgaven aan vechtsportclubs leiden er vaak toe dat meer, of andere, belanghebbenden betrokken raken bij het organiseren en reguleren van de sport. Dat vergroot de complexiteit, want meer belanghebbenden betekent dat meer en vaak verschillende waarheden en sturingspraktijken relevant worden in het organiseren van de sport. Zo blijken vrouwelijke vechtsporters een belangrijke plek te krijgen in het mannenbolwerk van de vechtsporten, moeten trainers

164

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 164 Samenvatting (Summary in Dutch)

diploma’s laten zien en verantwoording afleggen van wat ze met subsidiegelden doen en vindt controle plaats van promotors waarbij gekeken wordt naar hun financiële verleden en of zij een strafblad hebben. Welke waarheden uiteindelijk leidend worden in de organisatie en regulering van (vecht)sporten lijkt te worden onderhandeld in ‘strategische machtspellen’ waarbij betrokkenen trachten hun eigen belangen zo goed mogelijk veilig te stellen.

Deze dissertatie is de neerslag van twee casestudies waarbij zowel de waarheden als de sturingspraktijken in de full contact vechtsporten in Nederland opnieuw onderhandeld moesten worden. De vraag die in dit onderzoek centraal staat is hoe waarheden en sturingspraktijken in de vechtsporten worden aangepast om tegemoet te komen aan de veranderingen in hun sociaal-politieke context. Hierbij is nagegaan welke inzichten een ‘macht-sensitieve’ benadering oplevert bij de analyse van de aanpassingen van waarheden en sturingspraktijken. De ‘macht- sensitieve’ benadering werd in deze dissertatie uitgewerkt met werk van Foucault zelf en met werk van anderen die Foucault’s concept van governmentality als analytisch kader verder ontwikkeld hebben. De uitwerking en toepassing van deze ‘macht-sensitieve’ benadering in beide casestudies beoogt daarmee ook van waarde te zijn bij toekomstige analyses van complexe sturingsvraagstukken in andere (sport)organisaties. Tevens beoogt deze studie een bijdrage te leveren aan concrete sturingsvraagstukken die bijvoorbeeld naar voren komen in inen uitsluitingsprocessen in organisaties en aan reguleringsvraagstukken in de full contact vechtsporten op nationaal en internationaal niveau.

In de eerste casestudy staat een lokale boksschool centraal. Boksen, als een erkende Olympische sport, is in tegenstelling tot vele andere full contact vechtsportstijlen in Nederland strikt gereguleerd door één nationale boksbond. De casestudie startte vanuit een nieuwsgierigheid naar hoe diversiteit binnen een gym gemanaged wordt. Uit een eerdere studie bleek dat veel vechtsporters claimen dat in een gym iedereen gelijk is, dat sociaal culturele verschillen er niet toe doen. Het is bijzonder dat in een gym diversiteit met meer succes blijkt te worden gemanaged dan in menige andere organisatie. In de gym trainen boksers met verschillende sociaal maatschappelijke en culturele achtergronden; en vrouwelijke boksers blijken ook een volwaardige plek te krijgen in dit mannenbolwerk. Het doel van de eerste casestudy was om inzicht te krijgen in de mechanismen waarmee inen uitsluiting in een gym worden gemanaged om hiermee ook een bijdrage te leveren aan bestaande inzichten over diversiteitsmanagement.

De studie van de boksschool omvatte observaties, vele informele gesprekken en interviews. In het eerste artikel over deze case (hoofdstuk 2) wordt, met behulp van

165

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 165 werk van Foucault over disciplineringstechnieken, beschreven hoe de aanwezigheid van een diversiteit aan boksers gedurende de training wordt gereguleerd. Deze disciplineringstechnieken worden omschreven als passend bij de cultuur van vechtsporten waarbij de autoriteit van de trainers tijdens trainingssessies onomstreden is. De trainer is in staat om zijn waarheid over wat een ‘echte bokser’ zou moeten zijn, namelijk een gedisciplineerde hard trainende bokser die zich verre houdt van criminaliteit, dwingend op te leggen. Religie, etnische achtergrond en sekse zijn irrelevant tijdens de trainingssessies. Met zijn waarheid over wat een ‘echte bokser’ zou moeten zijn bepaalt de trainer ook dwingend wie ingesloten wordt en wie de deur gewezen wordt, of vanzelf niet meer terugkomt omdat hij zich daar niet thuis voelt.

Alhoewel de disciplineringstechnieken het meest op de voorgrond staan, blijkt dat de trainers niet almachtig zijn en dat zij ook op een andere manier moeten sturen om de grote diversiteit van boksers binnen de boksschool te houden. In het tweede artikel over de boksschool (hoofdstuk 3) blijkt dat de waarheid over wat een ‘echte bokser’ is ambigue en ook in bepaalde mate onderhandelbaar is. Voor en na trainingen, vaak in één-op-één gesprekken, onderhandelen trainers en boksers over hun waarheden over wat boksers zijn en moeten zijn. In deze onderhandelingen mogen sociaal-culturele verschillen en man-vrouw zijn wel relevant gemaakt worden. Trainers hebben er belang bij om hun getalenteerde boksers in hun gym te behouden; boksers hebben er belang bij om getraind te worden door een trainer met aanzien omdat hij hen wellicht naar de top kan leiden. Maar beiden hebben er ook belang bij dat ze tot uitdrukking kunnen brengen wat volgens henzelf een ‘echte bokser’ is. Dat is de inzet van de onderhandelingen voor en na trainingen. Hierbij worden machtstechnieken zoals overtuigen, verleiding en het aantrekkelijk maken van een eigen constructie van een ‘echte bokser’ door trainers en boksers ingezet om een eigen waarheid leidend te laten zijn in sturing in de gym. De combinatie van strikte historisch-cultureel bepaalde disciplineringstechnieken tijdens trainingen, en de onderhandelingen buiten de trainingssessies om, maakt het mogelijk om diversiteit te managen en daarmee ook de volledige participatie van vrouwen in deze gym te normaliseren. De conclusie van deze casestudie is dat diversiteit te managen is door eigen historisch-cultureel bepaalde machtstechnieken, die ingezet worden in de daarvoor geëigende settings. Ondanks dat het lijkt dat een trainer dominant is en kan opleggen wat de waarheid is over wat een ‘echte bokser’ is, zal hij toch ook moeten onderhandelen om aansluiting te houden bij wat er in de sociaal-politieke context speelt, en om (getalenteerde) boksers binnen zijn gym te houden.

In de tweede casestudy staat de impasse in de regulering van de minder

166

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 166 Samenvatting (Summary in Dutch)

gereguleerde full contact vechtsporten zoals kickboksen, Muay Tai en Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) in Nederland centraal. Geweldsincidenten en acties van lokale overheden zoals het verbieden van vechtsportgala’s enerzijds en de implementatie van overheidsbeleid via vechtsportorganisaties anderzijds, veroorzaakten discussies over wat deze full contact vechtsporten zijn en zouden moeten zijn, en hoe zij vanuit deze waarheden gereguleerd zouden moeten worden. In deze casestudie werden interviews gehouden met belanghebbenden uit de vechtsportwereld (trainers, vechtsporters, promotors, managers, scheidsrechter, bonden), met ambtenaren en leden van de sportraad, met een burgemeester en een wethouder en met vertegenwoordigers van de politie en NOC*NSF. Het doel van deze interviews, aangevuld met observaties en bestudering van documenten en (sociale) media, was zicht krijgen op de verschillende ‘waarheden’ over wat vechtsporten zijn en zouden moeten zijn, en hoe vanuit die waarheden problemen en oplossingen voor het reguleringsvraagstuk geconstrueerd werden.

Door het gebruik van het concept governmentality als een ‘macht-sensitief’ analytisch kader konden de verschillende waarheden en gerelateerde machtspraktijken ontrafeld worden. In het eerste artikel van deze casestudie (hoofdstuk 4) worden de drie meest voorkomende ‘regimes of practices’ (samenhangende waarheden en machtspraktijken) beschreven, namelijk redenerend vanuit een sport, economie of veiligheidsperspectief op vechtsporten. De analyse laat zien dat de impasse in stand wordt gehouden door een ‘dialogue of the deaf’ en een machtsvacuüm. De ‘dialogue of the deaf’ wordt gekarakteriseerd als een verwarrende onge- structureerde discussie waarin de verschillende waarheden en sturingspraktijken door elkaar lopen. Tevens is het meer een discussie van de vechtsport sector en de overheid over elkaar, dan met elkaar. Het machtsvacuüm ontstond omdat de gefragmenteerde vechtsportwereld niet in staat bleek om de sporten nog langer zelf te reguleren, terwijl de nationale overheid en NOC*NFS in de ontstane situatie geen leidende rol in de regulering van deze sporten voor zichzelf zagen weggelegd.

In hoofdstuk 5 wordt op basis van de verdere analyse van de ‘regimes of practices’ de overlap in waarheden over vechtsporten beschreven. Hieruit blijkt dat de regulering van vechtsporten gericht moet zijn op de invoering van een aantal – voor iedereen geldende – dwingende maatregelen, zoals eisen aan de gyms en aan vechtsportwedstrijden om de veiligheid en integriteit beter te waarborgen. Tegelijkertijd zou er meer aandacht en waardering moeten zijn voor de maatschappelijke waarde van vechtsporten. Naast dwingende maatregelen, die vooral vanuit de overheid worden verwacht, zouden een dialoog en onderhandeling tussen verschillende betrokkenen in de vechtsportwereld zelf, en tussen de vechtsportwereld en de overheid, de basis moeten vormen van een

167

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 167 gezamenlijke regulering van vechtsporten. Hiermee wordt in de toekomstige regulering van vechtsporten door overheid en vechtsportorganisaties een mix van machtstechnieken ingezet om tegemoet te kunnen komen aan de verwachtingen vanuit de sociaal politieke context. Het zichtbaar maken van de overlap in waarheden, maar vooral ook de verschillen in wijze van redeneren op basis van verschillende waarheden en de voorkeuren voor bepaalde sturingsmechanisme is essentieel voor toekomstige regulering. Ze leggen namelijk potentiele bronnen van weerstand bloot waar bij voorbaat rekening mee gehouden dient te worden in de regulering van sporten.

Uit beide casestudies blijkt dat waarheden en sturingspraktijken vloeibaar, onderhandelbaar en veranderlijk zijn. Veranderingen in de context vragen een heroverweging van waarheden over vechtsporten, over wat normaal en geaccepteerd wordt geacht en wat aangepast zou moeten worden aan de sturingspraktijken om tegemoet te komen aan hedendaagse verwachtingen van de vechtsporten. Beide studies laten ook zien dat een combinatie van meer dwingende, hiërarchisch overheersende machtstechnieken gecombineerd dient te worden met meer bemiddelende, verleidende en overtuigende machtstrategieën. Het gebruik van een ‘macht-sensitief’ theoretisch kader, gebaseerd op werk van Foucault en op dat van anderen die zijn concepten over disciplinering en governmentality verder uitgewerkt hebben, maakte het mogelijk om inzicht te krijgen in de onderhandeling van waarheden over vechtsporten en de daaraan gerelateerde voorkeuren voor sturing. Al lijkt de machtsbalans vaak ongelijk, deze studie laat zien dat ook de ogenschijnlijk meest machtige moet onderhandelen over de dominant gewaande waarheid over vechtsporten omdat anders ook de eigen belangen in gevaar komen. Bovenstaande inzichten en de uitgewerkte ‘macht- sensitieve’ theoretische benadering zouden ook een bijdrage kunnen leveren aan analyse van andere complexe sturingsvraagstukken in andere (sport)organisaties. Het geeft namelijk zicht op de samenhang van waarheden en samenhangende sturingspraktijken, de belangen die op het spel staan en de tegelijkertijd aanwezige ‘ongemakkelijke dissonantie’ van waarheden en voorkeuren van sturen die alle relevant zijn in de organisatie en regulering van sporten. Dat alles kan volgens Dean (2010) inspireren en een bijdrage leveren aan ‘doing things differently’ (p. 49), vooral in tijden waarbij organisaties zich dienen aan te passen aan nieuwe eisen en vragen vanuit de sociaal politiek context.

168

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 168 Dankwoord (Acknowledgements in Dutch)

Dankwoord (Acknowledgements in Dutch)

In deze fase van afronding van een proefschrift wordt vaak gevraagd: “..en hoe lang ben je er nu mee bezig geweest?” In een soort verwarring, zoekende naar een datum concludeer ik uiteindelijk dat ik misschien nooit officieel begonnen ben met deze dissertatie. Ja, ik ben ergens in 2008 gestart met de eerste casestudie in de boksschool, maar vooral verkennend in de zin van onderzoek doen en leren schrijven van wetenschappelijke artikelen. Na publicatie van de eerste artikelen kreeg het onderzoek langzamerhand de vorm van een proefschrift, echter zonder dat ooit een startdatum is vastgesteld.

Vanuit een passie voor onderzoek doen en puzzelen op complexe vraagstukken kwamen mensen op mijn pad die het mogelijk hebben gemaakt dat ik me in mijn eigen tempo en vanuit eigen nieuwsgierigheden kon bekwamen in onderzoek doen. Paul Verweel, Jan Boessenkool en Wim Koot waren de eerste inspiratiebronnen tijdens mijn studie Algemene Sociale wetenschappen. Hierdoor raakte in de ban van theorieën die het mogelijk maakten om cultuur en macht in en tussen organisaties te bestuderen. Paul en Jan boden me in 1999 een baan bij het CBM (later de USBO) aan waar ik dicht bij het ‘onderzoeksvuur’ zou komen te zitten. Dank beiden voor het vertrouwen dat jullie in me hadden toen ik werd aangenomen. Paul Verweel maakte het enkele jaren later ook mogelijk dat ik samen met Anton Anthonissen de eerste stappen kon gaan zetten in het doen van onderzoek. Anton was daarbij een prettige en geëngageerde leermeester. Samen publiceerden we drie boekjes over identificatieprocessen in de sport. Het was een genoegen om met Anton te werken en wil hem bedanken dat ik zoveel van hem mocht leren, meer dan alleen onderzoek doen. Wederom maakte Paul Verweel het mogelijk om vervolgonderzoek te gaan doen. Dit onderzoek stond aan de wieg van deze dissertatie. Veel dank Paul dat je me al deze mogelijkheden voor onderzoek gaf! Na een periode van oriëntatie en zoeken naar focus kreeg het onderzoek onder begeleiding van Annelies Knoppers de benodigde diepgang om tot internationale publicaties te kunnen komen. Annelies is gedurende vele jaren mijn fijne, trouwe en betrouwbare begeleider geweest. Ik leerde van haar om mijn mooie empirische verhalen theoretisch uit te werken en ontwikkelde stap voor stap de vaardigheden om in internationaal wetenschappelijke tijdschriften te publiceren. Haar ondersteuning en begeleiding zijn cruciaal geweest in de totstandkoming van dit proefschrift. Heel veel dank gaat daarom uit naar Annelies, dank voor alle (snelle) feedback, complimenten, enthousiasme, aanmoedigingen en al het andere dat we deelden. Een speciaal woord van dank ook aan Maarten van Bottenburg die in de loop van dit proefschrift betrokken raakte. We deelden als onderzoeker de fascinatie voor vechtsporten en je werd mijn collega, leidinggevende en uiteindelijk ook mijn

169

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 169 promotor. Dank voor je scherpe waardevolle feedback en het vertrouwen dat je me op verschillende momenten gedurende dit traject gaf. De ruimte die ik kreeg en jouw steun waren voor mij van groot belang om afgelopen jaren te kunnen groeien.

Het is nog steeds een groot genoegen om bij de USBO te werken. Wat een mooie organisatie met vele boeiende en fijne collega’s en een diversiteit aan werkzaamheden. Dank aan de vele collega’s die geïnteresseerd bleven, ondanks de lange weg die ik bewandelde. Met het gevaar dat namen vergeten worden toch een speciale dank aan oud collega’s die me dierbaar zijn: Marja, Jo, Monique M., Agniet, Mick, Martijn K. en huidige collega’s van de Sport & Society onderzoeksgroep Frank, Jeroen, Inge Cl., Noortje, Michel, Maikel, Eugene en collega’s die op een of andere manier belangrijk zijn geweest: Sebastiaan St. (“we hebben het gedaan!”), Kim L., Nienke, Arnold, Erika, Miranda, Paul A., Margo, Esther, Liliane, Inge B., Sabine, Gert, Mirko en Sandra S. Naast collega’s zijn mijn fascinerende, bijzondere en kritische studenten van OCM een continue bron van inspiratie en kennis. Dank ook voor wat ik van jullie heb mogen leren. Ook een speciaal woord van dank aan Joanne Romyn die ik nog nooit heb ontmoet maar die een deel van mijn Engelstalige teksten corrigeerde. Dank Jo!

Dit onderzoek was nooit tot stand gekomen zonder medewerking van de mensen in en rond de vechtsporten. Allereerst veel dank aan Fred Cohen, Raymond Joval en de boksers van Boksclub ABC in Amsterdam. Ik dank allen voor de gastvrijheid en de vele verhalen die met me gedeeld werden en die de basis vormden voor de eerste casestudie. In de tweede casestudy waren velen bereid om ruim de tijd te nemen om me uit te leggen hoe de vechtsportwereld functioneert en de achtergronden daarvan. Dank voor het delen van jullie kennis en ervaring. Speciale dank aan Brain Varma, Ilona Klaassen en Gertjan Dol voor de samenwerking en dank aan Marloes Coenen, Sem Schilt, Ernesto Hoost, Sandy Spil en Milco Lambrechts voor de jullie wijsheid. Door jullie ben ik beter gaan begrijpen wat passie voor vechtsporten betekent. Het onderzoek kreeg mede door Marc Theeboom, Jikkemien Vertonghen en Els Dom, collega’s van de Vrije Universiteit Brussel, een internationale dimensie. Dank voor de inspirerende wijze van samenwerken en ik hoop dat voor ons nog veel meer workshops en onderzoek in het verschiet ligt. Eric Lagendijk, dank voor de scherpe en inspirerende discussies over regulering van vechtsporten in Nederland.

De dierbaren om heen hebben het mogelijk gemaakt dat ik dit lange pad kon bewandelen. Ik stond nooit alleen. Allereerst mijn lieve ouders. Van jullie leerde ik snel zelfstandig te worden en mijn weg te volgen. Vertrouwen kreeg ik en leerde ik daarmee ook te geven. Mijn dierbare schoonouders To en Dick, ik ben dankbaar voor de vele jaren dat jullie naast ons stonden. Mam, zo fijn dat je er bij bent,

170

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 170 Dankwoord (Acknowledgements in Dutch)

Pap, To en Dick, juist op dit soort momenten zou ik willen dat jullie erbij zouden zijn geweest. Ons gezin, met mijn geliefde Dico die me met zijn onuitputtelijk interesse, geduld, humor en relativering ondersteunde en taken op zich nam als ik het weer eens te druk had. Onze prachtige zonen Bindikt, Arjan, Menno en onze lieve schoondochters Beike en Janneke en natuurlijk onze kleinkinderen Pieter, Eliza en Loeke. Jullie interesse en bemoedigingen waren heel belangrijk voor mij. Dico, Bindikt, Arjan en Menno, we delen de passie voor onderzoek doen en de interesse voor brede maatschappelijke thema’s. Bindikt ging ons voor, hij was me te snel. Arjan en Menno, nu zijn jullie aan de beurt! Succes met afronding van jullie proefschrift in 2018. Janneke en Beike, wat is het fijn dat jullie in ons leven kwamen, eindelijk niet meer de enige vrouw in ons gezin en twee mensen die mij snappen! Pieter, Eliza en Loeke, jullie waren de afgelopen 2 jaar een welkome afleiding en bron van plezier. Ik wist niet dat oma zijn zo leuk kon zijn.

Tot slot ben ik dankbaar dat ik Truus en Fieke heb leren kennen. Jullie zijn de voorlopers op het gebied van lokale duurzaamheid en eerlijke handel. Ik genoot van onze gezamenlijke campagnes. Ik geniet nog steeds van jullie verhalen, wijsheid en gedrevenheid. Rob en Annette, dank voor de vele gesprekken, tijdens de wandelingen in de bergen, etentjes en borrels. Speciaal dank voor Rob voor zijn schilderijen. Ik mocht twee keer een schilderij voor de cover van mijn publicatie kiezen uit jouw ruime werk en dat geeft mijn publicaties toch een mooi, persoonlijk accent.

Zoals er nooit een officieel startpunt was van mijn promotieonderzoek, zo zie ik dit proefschrift ook niet als een eindpunt. Het is een mooi tussenstation waar ik graag even bij stil sta. Doch, ik ga graag weer verder met wat ik beschouw als maatschappelijk relevant en interessant onderwijs, onderzoek en advies. Nu even terugblikkend, het was het een fantastisch pad en veel dank aan allen die mij hierbij ondersteund hebben.

171

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 171 Curriculum Vitae

Marianne Dortants (1959) startte in 1980 haar loopbaan als fysiotherapeute. Ze werkte 7 jaar in verschillende gezondheidszorg instellingen in Nederland en 3 jaar namens de Nederlandse Ontwikkelingsorganisatie SNV in het ziekenhuis van Niamey in Niger, West-Afrika. Na afronding van de studie Algemene Sociale Wetenschappen met specialisatie Organisatie, Cultuur en Management in 1996 werkte ze 2 jaar op het gebied van lokale internationale samenwerking bij SNV.

Eind 1999 startte ze bij het Centrum voor Beleid en Management (CBM), het latere Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap (B&O) van de Universiteit Utrecht. Vanaf die tijd is ze programmacoördinator en docent van de Masteropleiding voor professionals, Organisatie, Cultuur en Management en vanaf 2006 breidden deze taken zich uit naar het Bachelor en ander Masteronderwijs.

Van 2004 tot 2006 deed ze onderzoek naar de invloed van gender, etniciteit en sociale klasse op identificaties van getalenteerde sporters en managers in de sport. Daarna richtte haar onderzoek zich op praktijken van diversiteitmanagement in boksen en op vraagstukken rond de regulering van full contact vechtsporten. Ze is gespecialiseerd in kwalitatief organisatieonderzoek met speciale aandacht voor culturele en machtsprocessen in en tussen (sport)organisaties. Marianne werkte als gastdocent bij de Politieacademie en is lid van de auditcommissie Seksuele intimidatie van NOC*NSF. Daarnaast is ze als adviseur voor de Europese Raad betrokken bij de herziening van de richtlijnen voor full contact vechtsporten en betrokken bij de ontwikkeling van Monitoring-Evaluation & Learning methodologie voor een Sport for Development programma.

CV in English: Marianne Dortants (1959) started her career as a physiotherapist in 1980. She worked for 7 years in various healthcare institutions in the Netherlands and for 3 years on behalf of the Dutch Development Organization (SNV) in the Niamey hospital in Niger, West Africa. After completing the study of Social Sciences with specialization into the field of Organization, Culture and Management in 1996, she worked 2 years in the field of local international cooperation at SNV.

At the end of 1999, she has started to work at the Center for Policy and Management (CBM), the later Utrecht University School of Governance (USG) of Utrecht University. From then onwards, she is program coordinator and lecturer of the Master’s program for Professionals, Organization, Culture and Management, and since 2006 she has

172

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 172 Curriculum Vitae

extended her duties to Bachelor and other Master programs.

From 2004 to 2006 she did research into the influence of gender, ethnicity and social class on identification of talented athletes and sports managers. After that, her research focused on practices of diversity management in boxing and on issues in the regulation of full contact martial arts and combat sports. She is specialized in qualitative organizational research with special attention to cultural and power processes within and between (sports) organizations. Marianne has worked as a guest lecturer at the Police Academy and is member of the audit committee of Sexual Intimidation of NOC * NSF. In addition, as consultant for the European Council she is involved in revising the guidelines for full contact martial arts and combat sports. Also she is involved in the development of Monitoring-Evaluation & Learning methodology for a Sport for Development program.

173

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 173 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 174 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 175 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 176 Appendix 1. Co-auteursverklaring Hoofdstuk 2 2. Co-auteursverklaring Hoofdstuk 3 3. Co-auteursverklaring Hoofdstuk 4

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 177 Appendix 1 Co-auteursverklaring Hoofdstuk 2

178

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 178 Appendix 1 Co-auteursverklaring Hoofdstuk 2

179

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 179 Appendix 2 Co-auteursverklaring Hoofdstuk 3

180

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 180 Appendix 2 Co-auteursverklaring Hoofdstuk 3

181

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 181 Appendix 3 Co-auteursverklaring Hoofdstuk 4

182

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 182 Appendix 3 Co-auteursverklaring Hoofdstuk 4

183

515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 183 515232-L-bw-dortants Processed on: 28-11-2017 PDF page: 184