Gymnastik- och idrottshögskolan, GIH

Stories of body shaming in sports coaching are becoming increasingly present. Research also suggests that coaches adopt body shaming practices because they believe that athletes need to be fat-free to succeed. The assumption is that if athletes can attain a particular body shape, body composition, and body weight (e.g., child-like in women’s gymnastics; extremely thin in rhythmic gymnastics; slim but toned in swimming; thin and light in running), they are more likely to reach peak performance. To reach such ideal body shapes, coaches have been found to criticise athletes’ bodies, particularly female athletes’ body shape and weight, joke about young athletes’ bodies, not select athletes because of body composition (despite sufficient performance), demand extreme weight loss, and claim that weight loss would enhance performance. Body shaming can intentionally, unintentionally, or inadvertently be used in different sports coaching practices, but does not necessarily intend to harm athletes. The aim of the study in the presentation is to explore body sensitivity and body criticality sport coaching practices that have the potential to be shaming, or as we call it in the title, the ‘anatomy’ of body shaming. Data generation was conducted with 11 coaches from eight different sports in Sweden. We purposely selected individual and team winter and summer sports that are femininity-connoted (artistic swimming; gymnastics), masculinity-connoted (boxing; American football; ice hockey), and more ‘gender-neutral’ (cross-country skiing; orienteering). Building on the described literature on body shaming in sport, this study used photo elicitation, vignettes, and interviews for data generation, because such tools have shown to generate rich, in-depth, and detailed insights into the complexities of bod-ies in physical activity contexts. Photographs of a variety of bodies were sourced from different media and were used as a means of interview elicitation. Coaches were also presented with short scenarios about the topic under study. The results demonstrate that body shaming functions in different subtle ways and that coaches were well-aware of the potentially damaging influence that they can have on athletes. Seven types of body shaming practices in coaching practices were identified in terms of body critical and body sensitive practices. These were: 1. Shaming through unrecognition and avoidance; 2. Shaming through “good” body talk; 3. Shaming through education of athletes; 4. Shaming through the use of humour and irony; 5. Shaming through the use of science and tests; 6. Shaming through the making of weight gain a lack of motivation; and 7. Shaming through individualisation. The presentation concludes with recommendations for further research exploring how athletes experience the most subtle and invisible ways of body shaming, and how they internalise this well-intended but still potentially shaming advice.