Introduction <p>Acceptance of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer (LGBQ+) individuals in the United States and within sports has grown over the last 20 years. Despite progress, heterosexism persists in sports environments. Coaches hold considerable power within their teams, yet research on their attitudes toward LGBQ + student-athletes is limited.</p> Method <p>Thus, we investigated the perceptions of 1,242 coaches, through their responses to an open-ended question in an online survey, from all three NCAA divisions (<i>M</i><sub><i>age</i></sub> = 39.63 years; men = 51.13%; White = 83.66%; heterosexual = 73.35%) regarding LGBQ + athletes, focusing on their reasons for extent to which they would support and accept their athletes being open about their sexual orientation.</p> Results <p> Using reflexive thematic analysis and guided by queer theory, we identified six themes in coaches’ responses, demonstrating varied acceptance and support levels: (a) Levels of acceptance, (b) Supportive environments are essential, (c) I coach, therefore I am…, (d) As a queer coach…, (e) Limiting queerness, and (f) Sexual orientation does not provide a competitive advantage. </p> Conclusion <p> Our results highlight coaches’ attitudes that sustain heterosexism within sport environments and coaches’ attitudes’ that challenge such heterosexism and affirm queer student-athletes. Thus, we suggest avenues for LGBQ+ inclusion training for coaches.</p> Policy Implications <p> Findings emphasize the necessity of policymakers to develop educational programming and enforce policy that ensures welcoming, affirming sport environments for LGBQ+ athletes. </p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

NCAA College Coaches’ Attitudes Towards LGBQ+ Student-Athletes: A Qualitative Analysis

  • Macey Arnold,
  • Kasey Chambers,
  • Trent Petrie

摘要

Introduction

Acceptance of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer (LGBQ+) individuals in the United States and within sports has grown over the last 20 years. Despite progress, heterosexism persists in sports environments. Coaches hold considerable power within their teams, yet research on their attitudes toward LGBQ + student-athletes is limited.

Method

Thus, we investigated the perceptions of 1,242 coaches, through their responses to an open-ended question in an online survey, from all three NCAA divisions (Mage = 39.63 years; men = 51.13%; White = 83.66%; heterosexual = 73.35%) regarding LGBQ + athletes, focusing on their reasons for extent to which they would support and accept their athletes being open about their sexual orientation.

Results

Using reflexive thematic analysis and guided by queer theory, we identified six themes in coaches’ responses, demonstrating varied acceptance and support levels: (a) Levels of acceptance, (b) Supportive environments are essential, (c) I coach, therefore I am…, (d) As a queer coach…, (e) Limiting queerness, and (f) Sexual orientation does not provide a competitive advantage.

Conclusion

Our results highlight coaches’ attitudes that sustain heterosexism within sport environments and coaches’ attitudes’ that challenge such heterosexism and affirm queer student-athletes. Thus, we suggest avenues for LGBQ+ inclusion training for coaches.

Policy Implications

Findings emphasize the necessity of policymakers to develop educational programming and enforce policy that ensures welcoming, affirming sport environments for LGBQ+ athletes.