A Pervasive Silence

BY SUSAN L. FORBES, DlANE E. STEVENS AND ANNA H. LATHROP

attempts to "mainstream" famous lesbian sport per- sonalities in the media has led to an ironic twist: the perception that lesbianism is "a homosexuality of no importance" (Armstrong 1 1). Although the visibil- ity of lesbians in sport may have improved, equating visibility with a positive shift in attitude toward them is premature. One need only ask a group of contemporary varsity athletes about the issue of homosexuality and sport participation, and their answer is inevitably the same-"It doesn't matter." Our research question is designed to investigate the 'other side' ofthis silent denial in terms ofthe real costs that this strategy may have on the perceptions of athletes-both lesbian and heterosexual-who share the athletic team experience. As Vicki Krane suggests, this study is designed to investigate the belief that personal reactions to homonegativism, or Photo: Mar/ene purposeful, not irrational, negative attitudes and Cet article examine la relation entre la lesbophobie et la cohh- behaviors toward nonheterosexuals, may include distrust sion h l'inthrieur d'une hquije dans les sports. Des athl2tes of teammates and social isolation from the team (238, uniuersitaires ontcomplhtt!des mesures d'homonhgatiuismeet 242); specifically, whether lesbophobia adversely affects de cohhion sociale en rhaction Li. des situations hypothhtiques. social cohesion (i.e., social bonding) among team mem- Les rhsultats de cette htude ontremarquh aucune hidence bers. signzjcatiue d'homonhgativith et aucune corrhlation entre homonhgatiuitt! et cohhsion dans 12quije. Group dynamics, team cohesion and homonegativism in sport Nearly two decades ago, Billie Jean King commented that the presence of lesbians in sport was a reality shrouded in Group dynamics is an important area ofinvestigation that silence-a "silence so loud it screams" (cited in Vealey). has received considerable attention in the social and sport Since that time, academic scholarship and anti-homopho- psychology literature (Carron, Coleman, Wheeler and bia education has slowly moved toward efforts to trans- Stevens). Team cohesion is believed to be an important form this silence-first, through scholarship that identi- factor in the successful execution of a group task or fied the important role of sexuality in the construction of performance. Cohesion has been defined as "a dynamic gender and power relations in sport and physical activity process which is reflected in the tendency for a group to (Birrell and Cole; Kidd; Lenskyj 1986,1990; Messner and stick together and remain united in the pursuit of its Sabo), and secondly, through the validation of a distinct instrumental objectives andlor for the satisfaction of lesbian presence in sport (Cahn; Griffin 1992, 1998; memberaffectiveneeds" (Carron, Brawley, andwidmeyer. Palzkill). These investigations also revealed the hidden 2 13). Research has documented the role ofsituational and operations of compulsory heterosexuality, and challenged personal factors in the development and maintenance of homophobic and discriminatory practices that have se- team cohesion (Carron and Hausenblas). These factors verely limited the participation of allgirls and women in include physical and functional proximity (Festinger, sport and physical activity (Blinde and Taube 1992; Schachter and Back), individual satisfaction (Widmeyer Griffin 1992; Lenskyj 1991). Despite these efforts, how- and Williams 199l), and similarity in personal attributes ever, lesbophobia persists in sport (Fusco; Klasovec; Krane; of individual team members (Zander). More recent re- Thorngren; Vealey). Indeed, as one scholar noted, efforts search examined 32 different personal attribute anteced- to normalize the presence of lesbians in sport through ents of cohesion (Widmeyer, Silva and Hardy 1992).

32 CANADIAN WOMAN STUDIESILES CAHIERS DE LA FEMME and Team CO 3elt;iion in Sport

Results of this research indi- reflects a member's perception cated that personal attributes of togetherness, closeness, and most often identified, such as affiliation to the group. Group social background and race, were Integration Social (GIS) as- not important to the develop- sesses a team member's feel- ment ofcohesion in sport. Sexual ings about the similarity, close- orientation and homonegativity, ness and bonding- of the team however, were not investigated. as a social unit. Instructions for This study surveyed 106 fe- the questionnaire were modi- male varsity athletes. The pur- fied to direct participants to- pose of this analysis was three- ward perception of cohesion fold: to investigate the incidence based on the vignette. Cron- of homonegativity in varsity bach alphas for each ofthe four team contexts; to determine scenarios ranged from .72 to whether a correlation exists be- .76 (ATGS), and .70 to .73 tween homonegativity and per- (GIS). ceptions of social cohesion in The Modern Homophobia sport; and finally, to determine Scale-Lesbians (MHS-L; Raja whether homonegative- attitudes and Stokes, 1998) is a 24-item exert a significantly negative in- survey designed to measure at- fluence on perceptions of social titudes toward lesbians across cohesion. three factors: Personal Discom- Photo: Madene Hie/ema fort (PD; 10-items), Institu- Method tional Homophobia (IH; l l-items), and Deviance1 Changeability (DC; 3 items). Items were rated across a 5- Participants were 106 female athletes competing in team point Likert-type scale anchored at the extremes by 1 = sports at the intercollegiate level. These students ranged strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree. Higher scores on from year one to year four in their academic program. the subscale PD and IH indicate greater personal comfort Two vignette scenarios were created. In the first sce- with lesbians and beliefin their rights respectively. Higher nario the hypothetical team encounters a hostile crowd scores on the measure of DC indicate that female homo- where homophobic statements are heard. The sexual sexuality is deviant and changeable. Cronbach measures orientation of one of the players is manipulated (i.e., in ofinternal consistency indicated acceptablevalues for PD one vignette the athlete is identified as either a lesbian or (a = 39) and DC (a = .78). The measure of Institutional a heterosexual). In the second scenario, the attitude of the Homophobia was dropped from further analyses due to head coach towards lesbian athletes is manipulatedwhereby poor internal consistency (a = .66). either the coach has made repeated negative or supportive Intercollegiate coaches of female sport teams were con- comments regarding lesbian athletes. In each scenario one tacted for permission to survey their teams. Once granted, team member revealed to the team that she is a lesbian. athletes were assembled to request their participation. The Group Environment Questionnaire (GEQ) (Car- Athletes were informed of the purpose of the study and ron, Widmeyer and Brawley) was used to assess cohesion. that participation was voluntary. Confidentiality was as- The GEQis an 18-item questionnaire based on a concep- sured. Upon completion of an informed consent form, tual model in which cohesion is viewed as a multidimen- participants received the packet ofquestionnaires. Partici- sional construct comprising individual and group aspects, pants received two of four possible hypothetical team each of which has a task and social orientation. For the scenarios. Vignettes were counterbalanced to control for purposes of this investigation, only two measures of social ordering effects. cohesion were used. Attraction to Group Social (ATGS) To assess the incidence of homonegativity in intercol-

VOLUME 21, NUMBER 3 33 legiate athletes, descriptive statistics were computed on longer an identifiable concern-and that discriminatory the two MHS-L subscales. Responses indicated a rela- behaviour and practices are not an issue in the twenty-first tively high degree ofpersonal comfort with lesbians (M = century. 4.03, SD = .75) andlittle beliefthat lesbianism is adisease An alternative interpretation ofthe data, however, must or changeable- (M = 1.53, SD = .80). also be considered. The final statistical analysis of the Apoint-bise-rial correlation was conducted to assess the study compared the homonegative and homoneutral re- relationship between the scenario presented (homonegative sponses of the respondents. Again, these results indicated or homoneutral) and the measures of social cohesion. no difference-namely, that respondents did not identify Results indicated no significant relationship between sce- any difference between vignettes in which homonegative nario and cohesion (p > .05). As such, social cohesion did behaviour and comments were made and cases where not increase or decrease as a result of environment. neutral comments were offered. This finding, when con- A paired samples t-test was conducted to determine sidered within the context of the previous results, raises a whether social cohesion differed as a function of the critical question: why would a group of self-identified scenario presented. For the purposes ofthis analysis, only homopositive varsity athletes not perceive homonegative those receiving one homoneutral and one homonegative comments and behaviour as negative? Why would this scenario were selected. Results indicated no significant group not identify discriminatory behaviour as problem- differences across measure ATGS (t (53) = -.58, p > .05) atic? One explanation offered by researchers in the field of or GIS (t (53) = -1.29, p > .05). gay and lesbian studies points to the phenomenon of external and internal homonegativism-namely, that years Discussion and implications of socialization in which homonegativism- is tolerated and homonegative practices are common and often not pun- Despite expectations to the contrary, the results of the ished lead to desensitization and denial of the problem study did not illustrate the presence of lesbophobia in (Krane; Lenskyj 1999). Indeed, presuming that the sam- sport, nor did it demonstrate a connection between ple of 106 athletes included a percentage of both gay and lesbophobia and team cohesion. In fact, the sample popu- straight athletes, research in the developmental process of lation self-reported a relatively high degree of personal 'coming out' suggests that internalized homonegativity is comfort with lesbians as their teammates. They also considered a normal step in the developmental process of indicated the beliefthat lesbianism was neither a dysfunc- self-acceptance (Krane; Sophie). As such, it is entirely tional or a changeable behaviour. These results suggest possible that this sample ofvarsity athletes-both straight that the perceptions of the sample population were, and gay-may not have identified homonegativity as a generally speaking, homopositive. The second aspect ofthe problem. If this is the case, then the analysis that indicated analysis examined the relationship between the responses their self-identification as homopositive and the analysis to the homoneutral and the homonegative vignettes to that indicated no sigificant correlation between measures of social cohesion. Specifically,whether athletes homonegativity and team cohesion must be called into believed that homonegative attitudes, behaviour and com- question. ments had an adverse affect upon feelings of team cohe- Clearly, the results of this study warrant a re-examina- sion, expressed via a team member's perception of togeth- tion of the research question and a re-design of the erness, closeness, and bonding. The results of this analysis research method. What is not known is whether behav- indicated no statistical significance. The participants did iour is consistent with cognitions. Thus, identifying not perceive a significant relationship between the effect homonegativity as irrelevant for group cohesiveness is not of lesbo~hobiaand indicators of team cohesion in their equivalent to behaving as if it were so. If homonegativity sport context. Finally, the last aspect of the analysis is as pervasive as these results appear to suggest, then the examined whether responses to social and team cohesion research question needs to be addressed within a sample indicators differed as a function of the scenario presented. that includes both a general population, and a population In this analysis, once again, the results indicated no of lesbians who have achieved a positive self identity. significant difference. The interpretation of this data must be considered Conclusion within the wider context of research on lesbophobia and sport, and within the context of the methodological Critical to the success ofending lesbophobia in sport is the limitations of the study. The initial reading of the results demonstration that discrimination disadvantages allmem- indicates that this sample ofvarsity athletes did not reflect bers of a sport team-not simply lesbians. Lesbophobia any evidence of homonegativity, nor did they believe that and homonegativity, both within sport and our broader any evidence of homonegativity would adversely affect social context, continues to exist at a cost-a real cost- team cohesion or performance on their team. One inter- both in terms ofpersonal validation and in terms ofgroup pretation of this result might lead to the conclusion that cohesion and sport performance. Transforming this si- in the contemporary sport context, lesbophobia is no lence by demonstrating this cost, however, continues to be

34 CANADIAN WOMAN STUDIESILES CAHIERS DE LA FEMME elusive. Working toward an environment that affirms Informal Groups. Stanford, CA: Stanford University positive lesbian visibility addresses one aspect of the Press, 1963. problem; demonstrating how equity benefits everyone is Fusco, C. "Lesbians and Lockerooms: Challenging equally critical. Lesbophobia." Canadian Woman Studies/les cahiers de Lesbophobia is not a form of discrimination that will lafemme 15 (4) (1995): 67-70. simply 'go away' by virtue of silence, invisibility or the Grifin, P. (1992). "Changing the Game: Homophobia, pretense that sexuality "dosen't matter." More research is Sexism, and Lesbians in Sport." Quest 44 (1992): 25 l - warranted to push the parameters of this denial. As 265. Lenskyj observes, "The vicious cycle of invisibility and Grifin, P. Strong Women, Deep Closets: Lesbians and homophobia in women's sport needs to be interrupted in Homophobia in Sport. University of Massachusetts: a number of levels, both individual and institutional, Human Kinetics, 1998. before social change can be affected" (cited in White and Kidd, D. "Getting Physical: Compulsory Heterosexuality Young 76). Only then will the pervasive silence that and Sport." Canadian WomanStudies/les cahiers de la sexuality "doesn't matter" be transformed. femme 4 (3) (1983): 62-65. Krane, V. "Lesbians in Sport: Toward Acknowledge- Susan L. Forbes is an Assistant Professor in the Faculty of ment, Understanding and Theory." Journal of Sport Applied Health Sciences, Brock University, St. Catharines, and Exercise Psychology 18 (1 996): 237-246. Ontario. Susan > socio-historical areas of research and teach- Klasovec, S. "The Sexual Politics of Women in Sport: A ing include issues related to officiating, women, sport and Survey on Lesbophobia." Canadian Woman Studiedles leisure. cahiers de lafemme 15 (4) (1995): 63-66. Lenskyj. H. Out of Bounds: Women, Sport and Sexuality. Diane E. Stevens is an Assistant Professor in the Faculty of Toronto: Women's Press, 1986. Applied Health Sciences, Brock University, St. Catharines, Lenskyj. H. "Power and Play: Gender and Sexuality Ont. Her areas of research and teaching include group Issues in Sport and Physical Activity." International dynamics and team building in sport and exercise contexts. Review for Sociology of Sport 25 (1990): 235-243. Lenskyj, H. "Combating Homophobia in Sport and Physi- Anna H. Lathrop is an Associate Professor in the Faculty of cal Education." SociologyofSportJouma18(1 991): 61-69. Applied Health Sciences, Brock University, St. Catharines, Lenskyj, H. "Women, Sport and Sexualities: Breaking the Ontario. Anna? areas of research and teaching include the Silences." SportandGender incanadd. Eds. P. White and history ofwomen in sportandphysicaleducation curricubm. K.Young. Don Mills: Oxford University Press, 1999. Messner, M. A., and D. F. Sabo. Sex, Violence andpower References in Sports: Rethinking Masculinity. Freedom, CA: The Crossing Press, 1994. Armstrong, L. "Mainstreaming Martina: Lesbian Visibil- Palzkill, B. "Between Gymshoes and High-heels-The ity in the'90's." Canadian Woman Studieslles cahiers de Development of a Lesbian Existence in Top Class lafemme 16 (2) (1996):lO-14. Sport." International Review for Sociology of Sport 25 Blinde, E. M., and D. E. Taube. "Women Athletes as Falsely (1990): 221-235. Accused Deviants: Managing the Lesbian Stigma." The Sophie, J. "Internalized Homophobia and Lesbian Iden- Sociological Quarterly 33 (1992): 521-533. tity. Journal of Homosexuality 14 (1987): 53-65. Birrell, S., and C. Cole. Women, Sport and Culture. Thorngren, C. M. "A Time to Reach Out-Keeping the Champaign, Illinois: Human Kinetics, 1994. Female Coach in Coaching." JournalofPhysicalEduca- Cahn. S. K. Coming on Stron~Gender and Sexuality in tion, Recreation and Dance (1999): 57-60 Twentieth-CenturyWomen >Sport.Cambridge: Harvard Vealey, R. S. "Transforming the Silence on Lesbians in University Press, 1994. Sport: Suggested Directions for Theory and Research Carron, A. V., L. R. Brawley, and W. N. Widmeyer. in Sport Psychology. " Women in Sports and Physical (1998). "The Measurement of Cohesiveness in Sport Activity Journal 6 (1997): 165-188. Groups." Advancements in Sport and Exercise Measure- Widmeyer, W. N., J. M. Silva, and C. J. Hardy., "The ment. Ed. J. L. Duda. Morgantown, WV: Fitness Nature of Group Cohesion in Sport Teams: A Information Technology, 1998. Phen~menolo~icalApproach." Paper presented at the Carron, A. V., M. Coleman, J. Wheeler, and D. Stevens. Association for the Advancement of Applied Sport "Cohesion and Performance in Sport: A Meta-analysis." Psychology, Colorado Springs, 1992. Journal of Sport and Exercise Pychology (in press). Widmeyer, N.W., and J. M. Williams. "Predicting Cohe- Carron, A.V., and H. Hausenblas. Group Dynamics in sion in Coacting Sport." Small Group Research 22 Sport (2ndEd). Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information (1991): 548-570. Technology, 1998. Zander, A. Making Groups Effective. San Francisco: Josey- Festinger, L., S. Schachter, and K. Back. SocialPvessuresin Bass, 1982.

VOLUME 21, NUMBER 3 35