Sociological Tools for Improving Women's Representation and Experiences in Strength and Conditioning Coaching

Abstract

Women are underrepresented in strength and conditioning (S&C) coaching, arguably more so than women in sport coaching. They account for approximately 6–16% of strength and conditioning coaches at all levels, thus negatively affecting the gendered experiences of women working in S&C. Based on evidence from coaching research, this is likely because of longstanding patterns of structural bias and discrimination, which is inherent in sport, but it is important for future strength and conditioning coaches (SCCs), both men and women, that more equitable practices and opportunities are implemented. In this article, we present 3 sociological perspectives as tools for those working in S&C, including individual coaches, educators, governing bodies, and organizations, to critically examine their gendered practices and environments. We hope that by doing sociology within their day-to-day practice, those working in S&C can develop a better awareness of structural bias and forms of discrimination that affect women SCCs' experiences and then, where possible, make positive changes for women working in the field.

Experiences and Perceptions of Women Strength and Conditioning Coaches: A Scoping Review

“…As this review is informed by gender, which is viewed as a social construct, and refers to the cultural roles, norms and expectations attributed to men and women (Cislaghi and Heise, 2020); the term 'women' is adopted throughout. This is consistent with the recent work of LaVoi et al (2019) and Lord and Kavaliauskas (2022).…”

“…Despite the measured uptake, there are now multiple examples of active and effective use of the concept (e.g., Abdel-Shehid & Kalman-Lamb, 2017;Engh et al, 2017). Whilst recognising the potential danger of overuse, we argue and explain As men tend to be privileged when decisions are made to fulfil coaching roles (Norman et al, 2018), there have been calls within the sports coaching and S&C literature for deploying frameworks that centralise women's intersectional identities and their coaching career trajectories (Lord & Kavaliauskas, 2022;La Voi et al, 2019). One such framework is the Ecological-Intersectional Model (EIM) which is discussed below.…”

“…This has resulted in cultural biases towards certain corporeal architypes in SCC. In other words, a muscular physique in S&C is often privileged as it is socially perceived to indicate training expertise (Lord and Kavaliauskas, 2022). SCCs in possession of such physique are likely to be hired based solely on their corporeal appearance (Edmonds, 2018).…”

“…According to gender stereotypes, women have traditionally been viewed as inferior to men in all aspects of sport (Norman, 2021), including SCC coaching (Thomas et al 2021). As such women entering S&C transgress gender norms due to the masculine association with the profession (Lord and Kavaliauskas, 2022;Medlin-Silver et al, 2017). Consequently, the findings of the review reveal that participants were aware of the importance of presenting the "right (masculine) front" to athletes and coaches they worked with (Medlin-Silver et al, 2017;Sartore-Baldwin, 2013;Thomas et al 2021).…”

“…Specifically, the prevalence of hegemonic masculinity has had implications for both women and men, which privileges idealised forms of masculinity such as muscularity, aggression, and confidence (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005). As sport was created for men (Anderson, 2009), the constructed gender order has been resistant to change and permeates across all levels of sport, including S&C (Lord & Kavaliauskas, 2022). S&C, therefore, exist as a microcosm of society's values, stereotypes and prejudices around gender and related attributes to be successful as coaches, such as physicality, assertiveness, aggressiveness and dominance (Schull & Kihl, 2017).…”