"We Just Treat Everyone the Same": LGBTQ Aquatic Management Strategies, Barriers and Implementation

Abstract

This study examined the management of aquatic venues in a number of areas (facilities, programming, human resource management, marketing, policies) as it pertains to LGBTQ participants and participation. The study utilized in-depth semi-structured interviews with 16 aquatic managers to examine steps that are currently being taken (or lack thereof) when it comes to creating environments that are perceived to be open, or closed, to LGBTQ participants. A grounded theorybased process of data collection and analysis resulted in emergent themes. These themes included: (a) gendered spaces, (b) non-aquatic initiatives, (c) staff knowledgeability, (d) departmental and organizational mission, (e) aquatic-specific programming and regulations and (f) barriers to inclusion. Management strategies around these emergent themes are discussed, with implications for aquatic managers regarding the creating of inclusive environments for LGBTQ participant populations.

Conceptual Frameworks for Evaluating Diversity and Inclusion in Collegiate Recreation

“…The management of recreation facilities and programs has an impact on numerous stakeholders including the participants and employees. While diversity and inclusion is a goal often forwarded by collegiate recreation organizations and associations (Kaltenbaugh et al, 2017;Lower-Hoppe et al, 2019;Patchett & Foster, 2015), there is still critical work needed given ongoing research findings of inequitable experiences for recreation participants (Carter-Francique, 2011;Griffith et al, 2011;Schwartz & Corkery, 2011;Smith et al, 2007) and a lack of competency among recreation staff (Anderson et al, 2018;Kaltenbaugh et al, 2017).…”

“…As noted by the driving and resisting forces of the IFCD (Doherty et al, 2010), there are likely ways in which collegiate recreation practitioners do not engage or actively resist engagement in diversity and inclusion efforts. While some barriers have already been found (Anderson et al, 2018;Kaltenbaugh et al, 2017), further examination of resistance would benefit the field by illuminating opportunities to develop more effective approaches to counteract active and passive opposition to social justice.…”

“I’m Not an Expert, But…”: Perspectives on Aquatic Management for LGBTQ Participants

“…Aquatic managers within this study also reported that inclusion efforts are often made at the programming and departmental levels, but the efforts are generally reactive in nature due to specific participant requests or are extremely general in nature (i.e., programming for “everyone”). These types of efforts, while laudable and common in other aquatic spaces (A. R. Anderson et al, 2018), can create some problematic environments.…”

“A Group of Guys is Enough to Really Scare Me in General”: Sexual Minorities’ Vetting of Athletic Spaces

“…While these spaces likely present fewer logistical barriers to students overall, identity-specific barriers to SM initiation have been relatively underexamined, particularly in contrast to varsity levels. Much of the recent literature in this area has engaged perspectives of recreational sports staff (Anderson et al, 2018(Anderson et al, , 2020 or has focused specifically on barriers to inclusion for transgender participants (Patchett & Foster, 2015). Examining the ways SM themselves describe navigating decisions about initiation and persistence in sports and physical activity is important to supporting today's college student body in sustaining healthy lifestyles.…”