The absolutist and the interactionist perspectives are the main frameworks through which deviance in sports are examined. While the two perspectives serve the same purpose, they are wildly different. On the one hand, the absolutist perspective is based on the belief that there are some social norms accepted in sports and that failure to comply religiously with these norms constitutes deviance (Eitzen, 1988). For example, honesty is one of the values that are upheld by people in sports. When individuals engage in such dishonest acts as doping, they are regarded as deviant. Essentially, the absolutist approach recognizes that sports people should have strong characters that enable them to uphold established standards, rules and norms. On the other hand, the interactionist/constructionist approach is founded on the belief that through engagements with the people in their environment, individuals make their own judgments regarding right and wrong (Coakley & Hughes, 1994). Basically, this perspective recognizes that the determination of right and wrong involves complex negotiation as individuals balance their desires with the constraints of social norms. An individual is labelled deviant when they engage in behaviors that are found outside the scope of acceptable actions. Instead of establishing standard norms that all individuals are expected to follow, the interactionist perspective provides a broader range of acceptable behaviors, thereby recognizing the depth and complexity of human action and behavior.
The black box scandal and the Tonya Harding case serve as ideal incidents to apply the two perspectives introduced above to real world situations. In the black box scandal, it was revealed that the Chicago White Sox team was involved in match fixing. It was alleged that in exchange for monetary payment, the team chose to deliberately lose to the Cincinnati Reds. When one applies the absolutist approach to this case, what becomes clear is that the Chicago White Sox engaged in behavior that is appallingly deviant and unacceptable. Fair play, integrity and dedication are some of the values that define modern sport. Teams are expected to ensure that they stay clear of dishonest practices and recognize that in sport, the establishment of friendship is far more important than winning. The Chicago White Sox were in violation of these norms and their conduct was therefore deviant. Using the interactionist perspective, the same determination is reached. As already noted, this perspective allows for individuals to negotiate with norms and provided that their actions are within the range of acceptability, their behavior is spared the “deviant” tag. In defense of their actions, the Chicago White Sox could argue that sport is intensely competitive and that its members were forced to betray the values of the sport in exchange for cash payment. While this argument is sensible, it does not exonerate the team. The actions of this team constitute deviant under-conformity. This form of deviance is said to have occurred when an individual or group engages in behavior that falls below the range of accepted behaviors.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The Tonya Harding case involved an attack perpetrated by her husband against another athlete against whom Harding was competing to represent the US in the Olympic games. The absolutist perspective finds the actions of Harding’s husband and her alleged involvement to be deviant. This is because her actions go against such norms as fair play and integrity. On the other hand, the interactionist perspective yields the same judgment. Specifically, using this perspective, Harding’s conduct is determined to amount to deviant under-conformity. This is so because there is no doubt that harming a competitor violates the very basic principles on which sport is founded. There are no circumstances that would justify causing one’s competitor to suffer injury. The mere fact that the competition is intense and to gain an upper hand one is forced to resort to such underhand tactics as injuring their rival does not make this action morally acceptable. Therefore, while the absolutist and the interactionist perspective are based on different premises and values, they all lead to the same judgment in the cases of Tonya Harding and the Chicago White Sox.
References
Coakley, J. J., & Hughes, R. (1994). Deviance in sports: is it getting out of control? In Sport in society: issues and controversies. St. Louis: Mosby-Year Book, Inc.
Eitzen, D. S. (1988). Ethical problems in American sport. Journal of Sport and Social Issues. doi: 10.1177/019372358801200102
