Inclusivity & the Olympic Athlete: A Case Study of Foekje Dillema

Image: Foekje Dillema © Nationaal Archief, used under CC BY-SA 3.0 nl

1. Introduction

Sport is a ubiquitous social institution within almost every recorded society (Frey & Eitzen, 1991; Suter, 2009). As such, its universality insinuates a great potential to uphold the dignity of humanity (Frey & Eitzen, 1991; Washington & Karen, 2001). However, sport is itself a social phenomenon deeply woven into the frameworks of society (International Olympic Committee, 2020; Schut, 2018; Washington & Karen, 2001). According to Feminist theory, society is dominated by the presence of hegemony, in which inequality and exclusion define the discourse of history (English, 2017; Pieper, 2017). Moreover, its conception of patriarchy suggests that power is consolidated through sex and gender (English, 2017; Pieper, 2017). Notably, sport remains one of the final institutions where sex is conceptualized as a binary (English, 2017; Jarvie, 2011; Pieper, 2017). Individuals that transcend this traditional classification, such as intersex athletes, are deemed incompatible for competition (English, 2017; Jarvie, 2011; Pieper, 2017). Although Olympism preaches on sports ability to uphold inclusivity, these beliefs suggest otherwise. As such, this paper will examine the biological and social influences specifically to sex. By investigating the case of Foekje Dillema through a Feminist theory perspective, I will argue that our current framework of sex violates the dignity of peoples and impedes any potential to achieving inclusivity.

2. Case Study: Foekje Dilemma

Foekje Dillema came into athletic prominence in 1949 with her achievement of the Dutch national record in women’s 200-metre dash (Ballantyne et al., 2012; Kooman, 2003). Obtained during the Netherland’s annual multi-event Olympic Day, it was especially impressive as it was her first showing in elite sport (Kooman, 2003; Schut, 2018). Further, her record rivaled Fanny Blankers-Koen’s gold medal time from the 1948 London Olympics, in which she made history by winning four gold medals (Ballantyne et al., 2012; Kooman, 2003). Although Blankers-Koen did not compete, she was in attendance to congratulate Dillema and accept their newfound rivalry (Ballantyne et al., 2012; Kooman, 2003; Schut, 2018). In preparation for the upcoming 1950 European Athletic Championships in Brussels, the International Amateur Athletics Federation (IAAF), as it was previously called, required all female athletes to undergo mandatory sex verification testing (Ballantyne et al., 2012; Kooman, 2003). Following, Dillema was expelled for life by the Royal Dutch Athletics Federation (KNAU) due to the results of the supposed sex test (Ballantyne et al., 2012; Kooman, 2003). During a 2011 KNAU board meeting, seven years after her death, it was revealed that Dillema refused to attend, thus meaning the test never took place (Kooman, 2003; Schut, 2018). The fact that her career ended abruptly without appeal or public discourse suggests that assumptions were already made: Dillema was a man. Moreover, Dillema’s own internalization of sex and gender did not matter, she was a threat to sport as her appearance violated its ‘natural laws’.

3. The Social Construction of Sex

Firstly, it is crucial to differentiate between the concepts of sex and gender. According to Feminist theory, sex is a product of one’s physical and anatomical traits, while gender is how an individual behaves (Ballantyne et al., 2012; Segrave, 2016). Although my discussions ultimately consider the concept of sex, their interconnectedness is important to consider.

Contemporary sport has dominated by the notions of hegemonic masculinity (English, 2017; Jarvie, 2011; Pieper, 2017). Although this concept aims to identify the conflicts within gender, it upholds that men are physically superior (English, 2017; Jarvie, 2011; Pieper, 2017). Alongside Olympism’s fundamental principle of fair play, which seeks to maintain a level playing field, the argument for the sex-segregation of sport appears justifiable (Caplan, 2010; Henne, 2014). Thus, these guidelines rely heavily on the belief that sex strictly exists as a dimorphism (Caplan, 2010; Schut, 2018). However, as evident by the case of Dillema, this assumption is inherently flawed.

A study conducted by Ballantyne et al. (2012) provides important insights to Dillema’s case. In 1950, sex verification testing entailed anatomical investigation (Ballantyne et al., 2012). As Dillema refused to cooperate in these tests, the justification for her dismissal is likely that ‘she looked like a man’. However, this raises an important question: if Dillema was certain that she was a woman, why did she not utilize this opportunity to prove it? Unfortunately, her personal struggles will never be fully understood as she never publicly spoke of the situation (Ballantyne et al., 2012; Kooman, 2003). Notably, it is important the social climate of the post-WW2 era is likely is the best explanation. Although important progress was made for women’s sport, the ideals of hegemonic masculinity remained dominant (Kooman, 2003; Schut, 2018). The fact that only women were and have been subject to sex testing supports the notion that sport is highly stratified to favour men.

After DNA analysis of Dillema’s worn clothing, Ballantyne et al. (2012) came to the conclusion that she was an intersex individual. However, regardless of these findings, it is clear that Dillema was targeted by her physical appearance, which gave the perception of an unnatural advantage. Regardless, their findings bring important insight to the complexity and ambiguous nature of sex. Conversely, the definition for being intersex remains a highly contested field of research (Ballantyne et al., 2012; Jenkins & Short, 2017). While medical studies argue its exact quantitative prevalence, Jenkins & Short (2017) argue that it cannot be pathologized as sex is highly influenced by one’s social condition. Similar to the fluidity of gender, sex is the product of a complex mosaic of genetics that is further influenced by dynamics of social life (Jenkins & Short, 2017).

Crucially, sex is not definitive at conception, as sexual differentiation occurs in the sixth week of pregnancy (Wiesemann, 2011). While it is true that the X and Y Sex chromosomes influence being female or male respectively, the effect in which they influence development exists on a spectrum (Ballantyne et al., 2012; Wiesemann, 2011). Moreover, it is possible to lack a sex chromosome, have an extra sex chromosome, or for a given sex chromosome to ‘change its function’ within prenatal development (Wiesemann, 2011). As the sex chromosome influences the development of external genitalia, ambiguity can be produced (Wiesemann, 2011). Furthermore, sex is highly influenced over the course of one’s lifetime (Wiesemann, 2011). Although mainly during puberty, the sexual hormones elicit ‘male’ or ‘female’ secondary sexual traits (Wiesemann, 2011). Given the variability of gonadal development in-utero, these characteristics also exist on a spectrum (Wiesemann, 2011). In addition, environmental and social factors such as stress, physical environment, and the internalization of gender influence the spectrum of sexual development (Wiesemann, 2011).

4. Sex Testing and Inclusivity

Between 1950 and 1992 the IAAF required all female athletes to undergo mandatory sex verification testing (Ballantyne et al., 2012). As a means to maintain the integrity of competition, it is clear that inclusivity was not their priority. Despite the increase of women in contemporary sport, its founding principles of hegemonic masculinity remain rooted in its framework (English, 2017; Jarvie, 2011; Jarvie, 2017). The recent example of Caster Semenya, in which she also faced controversy for the perceived violation of natural laws, serves as evidence to its problematic nature and longevity (Schultz, 2011). The World Medical Association, which operates alongside the United Nations Human Rights Council, have criticized the IAAF’s use of sex testing as unscientific, unethical, and in direct violation of human rights (Wiesemann,2011). Although sex testing ceased in 1992, the ability to assess the sex of participants under any suspicion remains possible (Ballantyne et al., 2012; Wiesemann, 2011).

5. Conclusion

In my investigation for potential subject matters, I found the controversies of sex testing most interesting as it so clearly violates Olympism’s ideals of inclusivity. The case of Foekje Dillema provides an important example of the dehumanizing policies and practices of sex-testing in sport. Her athleticism and achievement of a national record in her first year of elite competition proves her sporting potential. If sport was socially constructed differently, there is no question Dillema would have worked her way to the Olympic games. However, with so many potential obstacles in front of her, her career was forced to end. In past classes, I often found the concept of hegemonic masculinity difficult to grasp I personally identify as a man. However, in this case, it is extremely obvious. The fact that Dillema was expelled simply by refusing to cooperate in the sex-test demonstrates the dominant position men hold in sport. In addition, given the recent case of Caster Semenya, it is clear that nothing has changed since Dillema’s expulsion. Moreover, sport remains fundamentally exclusive to individuals that don’t fit normality of male or female. Thus, I present my ultimate question: can sport continue to operate under the influence of sex dimorphism? Given my presented evidence, I argue that sport in its present form is a sickness within society discriminated against people through primitive means.

The opinions expressed in this manuscript are those of the author. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the University of British Columbia or its members. Please reach out to me if you have any comments, questions, or concerns.

This manuscript was submitted for the term paper of KIN 364 (The Modern Olympics) at the University of British Columbia. This manuscript was graded an A+.

References