Thursday, September 11, 2008

mixed abilities

The paralympics includes numerous sports at which it would be unfair to pit non-disabled athletes against paralympians. Running's a lot harder without legs.

But if the olympic movement really believes in all that 'uniting the people of the world' stuff then why don't they have a mixed paralympic/olympic games?

Wheelchair fencing, wheelchair rugby, wheelchair racing; all these would be equally good for able-bodied people. Even blind football, given that the players wear eyemasks, could be open to sighted people.

Target shooting, as I've already made clear, isn't a sport. But if it were then why couldn't it also be a mixed sport? In what way does being in a wheelchair make any odds to your performance? That's not a paralympian achievement, that's just the same shooting but sitting down.

Sure, it'd be unfair to pit blind footballers against the sighted ones, but then the olympics already distinguishes between people on grounds on grounds of physical ability in having separate versions of the same event for men and women.

Athletes with disabilites could be included in the olympics, but aren't. That being so, an argument could be made that the discrete paralympics actually encourages an attitude of separating people with disabilities from the rest of society.

Rather than have two games for paralympians and olympians, let's have just one games, all performance-enhancing substances allowed and even encouraged, then we'd get to the purpose of the Games: see all the world focused as one on what human athleticism can really be.

[NOTE: I can't tell to what degree I'm serious about any of this.]

4 comments:

Paul said...

I've known a young woman called Heather Frederiksen for about 5 years now. When I started training to be a driving instructor, she was on course to become one of the youngest instructors in the country, and also would probably have made the 2008 Olympic swimming team.

Then she got injured in training. She dislocated her right arm. A few months later, she had an accident at work. She was working with autistic adults, and one of them pulled the same arm out if its' socket. This time, the nerve damage spread, until it affected the whole right side of her body. Her right hand became a claw. She now uses a crutch to walk.

Being the extremely well motivated person that she is, she adapted. She re-learned how to drive, and can still drive a manual car, but she now drives an adapted, automatic vehicle, and will teach (generally disabled people) in n automatic once she passes her instructor tests, which I'm absolutely certain she'll do, and soon.

But for now, she's over in Beijing. With only one useable arm, she couldn't possibly have competed against two armed opponents, but what she has done is set a load of world records and won a silver and a gold in her events.

Here's her reaction.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/disability_sport/7608146.stm

merrick said...

Paul, Heather sounds like a truly remarkable woman.

Like I said I'm not sure how much I believe any of this, I think I'm just chasing some thoughts around to see where they go.

I'm not saying that Heather could've competed against two-armed swimmers. I made clear that where there's a physical ability difference we already have separate versions of the same event for men and women.

So having a separate paralympics is surely as odd as having a separate mens and womens olympics. Why aren't the paralympic events included in the main olympics?

But more particularly, why aren't able-bodied people playing wheelchair sports or blindfolded sports? And why does an archer who is a wheelchair user not compete in the main olympics?

Paul said...

I agree by and large, Merrick. I'm not really offering an argument, more telling someone's story. Participating and winning against equivalent athletes meant something to her.

One thing that did disappoint me was the IOC's decision to bar south African runner, Oscar Pistorius from competing alongside able bodied runners.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics/athletics/7510774.stm

Able bodied people competing in wheelchairs is an interesting take. I think disabled people might object as it would steal their thunder. People do take pride in being what they are, and a wheelchair can be a potent symbol.

merrick said...

I'm not really offering an argument, more telling someone's story.

Fair enough - it's a good story!

the IOC's decision to bar south African runner, Oscar Pistorius

The quotes from the IAAF guys! One saying it's for safety reasons, another saying it's a lack of resources to check what Pistorius is running with.

I'm sure the funds can be found to help them do the latter. Poor old IAAF, so skint, eh?

Able bodied people competing in wheelchairs is an interesting take. I think disabled people might object as it would steal their thunder.

But if we're looking at people being regarded as equals and trying to destigmatise, I can't see what the objection would be. Personally, I imagine I'd feel the opposite - something that breaks down barriers and stops separatism would be great. Especially if the disabled players whupped the able bodied.

a wheelchair can be a potent symbol

Absolutely. Just ponder the symbolism of able bodied people choosing to be in wheelchairs. Imagine that at an olympics where Pistorius is running against those with biological legs.