Humour, masculinities and youth sport coaching: ‘Good morning, ladies!’

Abstract

In this paper, I explore male youth sport coaches' use of humour in relation to the reconstruction of masculinities, contributing to an emergent body of literature on the role of humour in coaching. Three creative non-fiction stories developed from my own coaching experiences in a competitive youth football (soccer) academy are used to examine: (1) coaches' reconstruction of hegemonic/esteemed masculinities; (2) coaches' use of humour to encourage realignment with hegemonic masculinities, and; (3) coaches' use of (counter-)humour to disrupt hegemonic representations of masculinities. The stories offer sport coaches and educators with a resource to reflect on masculinities, gender relations, and the everyday use of humour within their own contexts.

Undergraduate perspectives on the epistemological chain in adventure sports coaching

“…Whilst not documented in an ASC context there is some empirical evidence that inclusionary forms of humour have an important unifying force in group relations (Edwards and Jones 2018). Conversely coach humour also has the potential of being problematic in perpetuating hegemonic masculine ideologies (Adams 2020). In this study accounts of coach humour were mentioned only by male participants who also described 'Laddie' behaviour and banter with coaches.…”

The “Othering” of Latina Girls in School Sport Contexts

“…The othering of girls also occurs in youth sports. Coaches continue to employ a “masculinist hidden curriculum and a way of ‘doing gender’ located in displays of toughness, physical domination, and avoiding softness” that others girls (as well as boys) who fail to live up to these masculine expectations (A. Adams, 2020, p. 468).…”

Investigating the athlete-environment relationship in a form of life: an ethnographic study

“…A growing body of research has continued to identify the normative practices apparent in sport cultures and organisations (e.g., Adams, 2020;Blackett et al, 2019;Purdy et al, 2009). To advance these findings for the benefit of athletes and coaches, Anver et al (2020, p. 14) have argued for a "deeper understanding of the docility-producing effects" that are a consequence of attitudes toward coaching, learning and knowledge, deeply rooted in historical sociocultural factors.…”