Bike Racing, Neutralization, and the Social Construction of Performance-Enhancing Drug Use

Abstract

Drawing from participant observation and interviews, I examine the attitudes and beliefs of elite and former professional cyclists and team personnel regarding performance-enhancing drug (PED) use and the neutralization techniques they employed to excuse and justify PED consumption. Participants most frequently adopted accounts in which they condemned the condemners, viewing as hypocrites those labeling PED use as deviant, and arguing that all manner of PED use is commonplace throughout society. Participants further expressed distrust of sporting federations, law enforcement, and medical professionals, whom they viewed as exaggerating and distorting information about the dangers of PED use. Riders also appealed to higher loyalties and defense of necessity, claiming that PED use was for many professional cyclists nearly an occupational necessity. Members viewed PED use as a rational means to an end while also embodying fundamental tenets of professional cycling culture which prizes risk taking and commitment.

Doping vulnerabilities, rationalisations and contestations: The lived experience of national level athletes

“…Specifically, participants highlighted that when an athlete believes others are doping, they thought that the use of PES may become more normalised and acceptable to them. Whilst previous research has demonstrated that cyclists could justify and neutralise their own behaviour through the actions of others (Sefiha, 2012) via 'diffusion of responsibility' (Boardley & Grix, 2013;Boardley, Grix, & Dewar, 2014;Boardley, Grix, & Harkin, 2015); this study extends previous findings. Harry (R) confessed to starting to think doping was normal and acceptable because he believed everyone else was doping, yet he refrained from doping because of his father's advice and the reminder he received about his personal principles.…”

“…With the exception of autobiographical insights (Alker & Stott, 2012;Newton & Wilkinson, 2010), these findings are the first of their kind to highlight the needs of professional rugby league players in terms of having an identity and qualifications beyond rugby to protect them from doping in sport. They do however match the concerns of cyclists who felt their career options were limited beyond cycling due to their lack of qualifications (Sefiha, 2012). To assist with transitions out of sport and to recognise the precarious nature of sporting careers, national level athletes might be encouraged to develop career plans (Aubel & Ohl, 2014;Hardie, Shilbury, Ware, & Bozzi, 2010).…”

“…For example, athletes may not use PES to outperform others but simply as a means to 'keep up' (Pappa & Kennedy, 2013;Sefiha, 2012). Nor need it necessarily be deviant in terms of being an irrational decision.…”

Questions of fairness and anti-doping in US cycling: The contrasting experiences of professionals and amateurs

“…Previous research on doping in cycling has focused on the professional level (Mignon, 2003 ; Ohl, Fincoeur, Lentillon-Kaestner, Defrance, & Brissonneau, 2013 ; Sefiha, 2012 ; Waddington, 2000 ), while largely neglecting the lower amateur levels of sport and masters competitors in higher age categories. In this study, we focus on the cases of all American cyclists, amateur and professional, who were caught doping and sanctioned during the period 2001 and summer 2014.…”

Bad Sports: Explaining Sport Related Deviance

“…As with other forms of overconformity to the sports ethic, the risky behavior characteristic of many elite sports such as a willingness to jeopardize one’s health by consuming experimental PEDs, becomes a socializing practice and emblematic of the athlete’s dedication and devotion to the sport. Sefiha (2012) found that PED use was not viewed solely as deviant or as cheating but rather an occupational requirement, an often necessary, if unfortunate, reality of the cycling occupation. Deeply sociological, the notion of deviant overconformity highlights the process by which acts of deviance become institutionalized within sporting cultures while also serving as a powerful critique of popular individualistic explanations for PED use.…”