The world of sport can be a complex place at times. First and foremost it is a competitive environment. In almost every sport individuals and teams compete against each other in order to find a winner. Despite the modern trend of every single participant receiving a trophy or a medal, most know that there can only be one winner.
In recent times we have seen a push for “equality” in sport. Yet it would appear that it is not actually “equality” that sport needs but “equity.”
The trouble is many pushing for “equality” do not understand the difference between the two words, and herein lies a very deep problem, for so many sports have happily gone down an “equality” path to appease governments funding sport or reactionaries within the sport.
What all sports need to ensure is that there is equal opportunity for all. Regrettably this has probably not been the case in many sports in recent times as the rising cost of participation is excluding a large portion of society. The same is true when it comes to watching live sport, in many cases the cost is prohibitive when it comes to a parent taking their children to a top flight game.
The words “equality” and “equity” are often confused. At a glance, they appear to mean the same thing. They both are used in every day life, and especially when it comes to law, the government or economics. Importantly both words have to do with the way people are treated.
Often, both words are used to describe actions, laws, or rules that are put in place, and which are attempting to end or fight against injustice or unfair treatment of people. Yet “equality” and “equity” are not synonyms, and the methods used to achieve them often could not be more different.
The word “equality” is defined as “the state or quality of being equal.”
Equality is simple to understand: two teams made up of eleven players are equal. They both have the same number of players. Of course those eleven players may differ in their ability. So can “equality” in sport really be achieved in the same way as if you put five oranges in a bucket, and another five in an identical bucket? Some will argue that while that is equality, the flavour of each orange, like the ability of each player will differ. So when one digs deeper one finds that what on the face of it appears to be equal may in fact not be.
In many countries the law states that nobody can be legally denied their rights based on any personal quality. However we all know that we are all very different people.
Rather than striving for “equality” should not sport be looking to ensure equal opportunity?
Or should they be looking to achieve “equity?”
The word equity is defined as “the quality of being fair or impartial; fairness; impartiality” or “something that is fair and just.”
One reason that sport may have avoided using the word is that when it comes to “equity” people often disagree on what is “fair” or “just.” This is very subjective, just like one person may feel that a send off in sport is just, another may not feel the same way.
As we have seen in society, laws and policies that attempt to achieve “equity” are often challenged in court, and no matter the decision or outcome that may then end up being challenged.
Today the word “equity” is frequently used in relation to concerns about social justice and people’s desire for fairness for historically oppressed groups. As most will be aware these minority groups may have equal rights, but many are still judged and treated treated unfairly.
The truth is that in sport rarely is there either “equality” or “equity.”
If there truly was “Equality” it would means that each individual, team/club or sport would be given the same resources or opportunities. That does not happen. Maybe it doesn’t happen because sport is now about the dog-eat-dog world of business. If so then let’s end the charade and stop bandying about the word “equality” when there is absolutely no intention to ensure that it exists.
“Equity” recognises that each individual, team/club or sport has different circumstances under which they operate. Having recognised that, in order to be equitable surely the exact resources could be allocated and opportunities created that are needed in order to reach an equal outcome?
While everyone is looking to make the playing field equal they are missing the point that the structures and systems in place aren’t naturally inequitable. Just like society, they have been intentionally designed to reward a specific demographic. Today this inequality may look to be unintentional, but as with all things one has to go back in history to understand how you ended up where you are, and in most cases you will discover that the current situation was created through discriminatory practices and beliefs.
Is this predicament going to be fixed with “equality” or with “equity?”
The misguided push for “equality” is really beginning to take its toll on many sports, and many clubs. In many cases it is not a workable solution and very soon something is going to have to give.
Most concerning is news that a Government department in Australia is offering financial incentives to sports to make sure that their Executive boards are made up of an equal number of males and females. In other words the organisation must create a quota-system. Is this the right thing to do? Where will the line be drawn? If this is what is being asked now, how long is it before all boards must be multicultural, and have someone with a disability so that these individuals needs are properly addressed? The last is actually something that many boards do in fact fail to consider!
The whole point of a board is to ensure good governance. It should have nothing to do with equal representation if you appoint the correct people. If you have clear and defined roles for your board members, and they in turn oversee key components of the sport, and have the required expertise to carry out that role, everything works well and the sport thrives. The key component is making sure that you appoint people with the relevant expertise irrespective of their sex. To start applying pressure via funding to turn Governance into a quota system is short-sighted in the extreme.
Probably one of the best people to sum up the current situation was Paula Dressel from the Race Matters Institute who said, “The route to achieving equity will not be accomplished through treating everyone equally. It will be achieved by treating everyone justly according to their circumstances.”
Sporting Boards and associations, clubs and teams would be wise to take heed of her words, and learn the difference between “Equality” and “Equity,” as sport clearly needs more “Equity” if it is to reach its full potential.
