A narrative inquiry into the physical education and youth sport experiences of gay male rugby players: a Bourdieuian perspective

ABSTRACT

Background

Emerging within the Physical Education (PE) and Youth Sport (YS) context is literature that runs counter to a previous focus on the negative treatment and outcomes for gay pupils (Monk, D. 2011. “Challenging Homophobic Bullying in Schools: The Politics of Progress.” International Journal of Law in Context 7 (2): 181–207; Anderson, E. 2011b. “Masculinities and Sexualities in Sport and Physical Cultures: Three Decades of Evolving Research.” Journal of Homosexuality 58 (5): 565–578), as they negotiate their way through a predominantly heteronormative environment (Landi, D. 2018. “Toward a Queer Inclusive Physical Education.” Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 23 (1): 1–15). While it would be false to assume that a vast number of gay young people do not suffer at the hands of gendered expectations and homophobic abuse (Stonewall. 2017a. Schools Report Scotland: The Experiences of Lesbian, Gay, Bi and Trans Young People in Scotland’s Schools in 2017.), there remains an absence of research into those who have successfully negotiated this – at times – toxic climate (Marshall, D. 2010. “Popular Culture, the ‘Victim’ Trope and Queer Youth Analytics.” International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education 23 (1): 65–85; Monk, D. 2011. “Challenging Homophobic Bullying in Schools: The Politics of Progress.” International Journal of Law in Context 7 (2): 181–207).

Purpose

This paper seeks to make a meaningful contribution to addressing a gap in current research by exploring specifically the lives of gay men who have continued to engage in physical activity (PA) in later life. By exploring these individuals’ PE and YS experiences, greater detail can be identified to how inhibiting factors were mitigated and facilitating factors were exploited in leading to their successful current participation.

Design and analysis

Three gay males’ experiences are explored through a narrative approach that provided a voice to, and challenged, the cultural story of this often-marginalised community. Through the theoretical lens of Bourdieu’s (Bourdieu, P. 1977. “Structures and the Habitus.” In Outline of a Theory of Practice, 72–95. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Bourdieu, P. 1986. “The Forms of Capital.” In Handbook of Theory and Research on the Sociology of Education, edited by Pierre Bourdieu, 241–258. Westport: Greenwood; Bourdieu, P. 1989. “Social Space and Symbolic Power.” Sociological Theory 7 (1): 14–25; Bourdieu, P. 2002. “Habitus.” In Habitus: A Sense of Place, 43–53. Burlington: Ashgate) underpinning social theory, and his conceptual tools of Habitus, Capital and Field, the researchers were able to disentangle the complex negotiations of three gay males’ social experiences offering detailed and unique insights throughout each stage of the research process. Within their stories, notions of heteronormativity, hypermasculinities and low perceived physical competence were identified as inhibiting factors, while increased opportunities, representation and education were recognised to facilitate their return to rugby and potentially enhance future youth PE and YS experiences.

Conclusion

The paper makes links between three gay males involvements in PE and current engagement in YS, and identifies how inhibiting factors were mitigated and facilitating factors were exploited in order to achieve successful current participation.

KEYWORDS:

• Physical education
• youth sport
• heteronormativity
• hypermasculinities
• narratives

Introduction

Emerging within the Physical Education (PE) and Youth Sport (YS) context is literature that runs counter to a previous focus on the negative treatment and outcomes for gay pupils (Monk 2011; Anderson 2011b), as they negotiate their way through a predominantly heteronormative environment (Landi 2018). While it would be false to assume that a vast number of gay young people do not suffer at the hands of gendered expectations and homophobic abuse (Stonewall 2017a), there remains an absence of research into those who have successfully negotiated this – at times – toxic climate (Marshall 2010; Monk 2011). Learning from the social conditions of gay men in the context of PE may allow teachers to rethink these positions and reduce the current statistics that exist around gay men in the UK which indicate; 81% being personally targeted by homophobic slurs; 26% receiving verbal threats and 21% experiencing physical assault (Denison, Bevan, and Jeanes 2021).

Landi et al. (2020) synthesised the over 40-year history of LGBT+ research within PE, explicitly routing back to the work of Cobhan (1982). Within the vast study on this topic, four streams of research had been identified (Landi 2019a) – research on attitudes, perceptions, and climate; teachers experiences; teacher education programmes; and the reflective experiences of adults. The historic understanding of these steams demonstrates a challenging environment for both LGBT+ young people and teachers, whereby there was little space for LGTB+ bodies or identities to be positively legitimised within PE (Clarke 2006; Sykes 2011; Denison and Kitchen 2015; Deví-Devís et al. 2018). Furthermore, teacher intervention was often characterised as infrequent, ineffective, and at times contributing towards this challenging environment (Clarke 2006; Sykes 2011). However, more recent inputs to these streams have posed some improvement across these areas. In particular, a desire to support change, teacher’s professional awareness of some LGBT+ youths’ challenges, and students’ critical awareness of contributing factors to their experiences (Berg and Kokkonen 2021).

Denison and Kitchen (2015) and Denison, Bevan, and Jeanes (2021) support the call for intervention and explore drivers of lack of safety within the PE context. It is through this work a cycle of LGBT+ exclusion and discrimination can be identified. This involves young people witnessing homophobia in action; seeing these behaviours being accepted by peers and feeling a need to conform; which impacts their sense of safety and acts as a catalyst for masking their identity or dropping out. This cycle continues. Fitzpatrick and McGlashan (2016) suggested that PE could break the cycle of homophobia by re-thinking straight pedagogy’s positions.

Consequently, this paper seeks to make a meaningful contribution by addressing a gap in current research by exploring specifically the lives of gay men who have continued to engage in physical activity (PA) in later life. By exploring these individuals’ PE and YS experiences, greater detail can be identified to how inhibiting factors were mitigated and facilitating factors were exploited in leading to their successful current participation. Through the theoretical lens of Bourdieu’s (1977, 1986, 1989, 2002) underpinning social theory the researchers were able to disentangle the complex negotiations of three gay males’ social conditions and make links between their past involvements in PE and YS and their current engagement in PA.

A Bordieuian perspective

The researchers’ integration of Bourdieu’s (1977, 1986, 1989, 2002) conceptual tools of habitus, capital, field, and their related features of Doxa and Illusio, supported detailed and unique insights throughout each stage of the research process.

Habitus more explicitly refers to the embodiment of an individual’s beliefs, values and tastes that derive from their interactions and socialisation (Bourdieu 2002). Critics suggest that this concept may be deterministic in nature. However, as Hilgers (2009) argues, the vast blend of interactions involved in the formation of one’s habitus, in addition to the complex relationships with a person’s resources and social context, demonstrate that an individual’s actions are not inevitable consequences of their socialisation, but far more convoluted. The most stable elements of a habitus occur during early childhood and are then built on throughout school, further education or other life experiences (Bourdieu 1977). Jenkins (2002, 75) describes the acquisition of one’s habitus to be in part an unconscious process, yet equally postulates that it is not fixed, but durable and subject to change through further life events. For example, a person brought up in a homophobic environment may have these beliefs reinforced, however, if their sibling were to then come out as homosexual, this could shift their own and families perspective. Such is the evolving and iterative nature of habitus, a social context can influence an individual, likewise an individual can influence the social context (Bourdieu 1977, 72).

Capital is described as valued resources that an individual has access to directly or through their connection to others that has a value of exchange (Bourdieu 1986). Capital is originally seen in three key forms: the economic, which refers to disposable income, property and investments; the cultural, that in its embodied state denotes the knowledge one accrues, in its objectified state means the physical object such as books or art one possesses, and in its institutionalised state is seen through the qualifications or certificates one holds; and the social, this being the resources available through one’s professional and personal connections (Bourdieu 1986). For capital to have worth it must be recognised as valuable by the context, with its symbolic nature defined by the procurement of recognised resource or reputation (Bourdieu 1986). For example, a PE department that recognises hard work in their core classes with a ‘player of the month’ board would have to instil in their classes the value and prestige of obtaining such a position for pupils to feel driven to work towards its achievement. Within research, the ability to conceptualise individuals’ resources in such a way allows scholars to identify inhabitants of specific capital, the benefits it bestows, its reproductive nature, and the impact to others (exemplified in Johansson and Hojer 2012; Gripsrud, Hovden, and Moe 2011).

The final core conceptual tool of Bourdieu is that of field: the social context where individuals are situated and operate within a hierarchy (Jenkins 2002). The hierarchical position is competed for through the acquisition of capital and the value attached in each competing field (Jenkins 2002; Hilgers and Mangez 2015). For instance, a student clearly articulating challenges LGBT+ individuals experience in school sport may be highly valued within their schools LGBT+ and allies group, but less so if discussed with their peers at their sports training session. Grenfell and James (2004) suggest that although society presupposes the individual, the habitus of those in a given field may inform the capital that is valued as a collective enterprise (Bourdieu 1977, 1990, 131). Conversely, social factors join a field to a set of universally understood yet unwritten rules (the nomos), this is driven by the world vision of the field which through division separates the group hierarchically based on the possession of valued capital (Bourdieu 1989). When entering the field, the individual is influenced by doxa, the perception that this construct is the ‘natural order and therefore is accepted’ and maintained (Jensen 2014, 7). However, this is a misrecognition, as it does not account for the means in which the capital is accumulated – often hereditary – therefore those who benefit from the system seek its reproduction, this being the process of illusio (Grenfell and James 2004). This maintenance of the doxa can be challenged, if an alternative form of capital is symbolically recognised by others and is subsequently popularised as valued capital, best explained through Bourdieu’s (1996) work on the Avant-Guard. However, more commonly incongruent habitus and forms of capital do not receive recognition and result in consequences that facilitate accepting the doxa. The recognition of this dominating pressure towards acceptance is known as symbolic violence (Jensen 2014). Nevertheless, change occurs because the social context is never fully autonomous, existing within or being influenced by other fields (Hilgers and Mangez 2015). To illustrate, the field of a PE class exists within its department, school, local authority and so on, and each subsequent level’s valued capital influences the next. Therefore, significant curricular change on a national level impacts all subsequent fields. As was seen with the introduction of Section 28 of the Local Government action in the UK in 1988. Whereby for 14 years promoting or supporting the acceptability of homosexuality was illegal for local authorities, therefore teacher felt their ability to discuss or address challenges experienced by LGBT+ young people was impeded (Epstein 2000).

Although primarily engagement with a Bordieuian perspective was to more fully examine and comprehend the complexities of participants stories: initially it served as a lens to facilitate a deeper and more explanatory understanding of inhibiting factors and enabling interventions outlined in the literature – such as society’s long-standing heteronormative discourse, where heterosexuality is assumed and divergences are marginalised (Steck and Perry 2018).

Heteronormative discourse

Through early childhood, Bourdieu (1977) explains that gender roles emulsify into one’s primary-habitus as the doxa of society divides labour between sexes, which is problematic for those whose sexuality is in conflict (Skeggs 2004). This is because hierarchies form through characterising the degree to which an individual meets the ‘straight’ expectation, consequently producing inequalities by subsequent losses of power, opportunity and safety to the nonconforming parties (Jackson 2006). Although one could suggest this perspective fails to acknowledge families where early socialisation does not align with a traditional nuclear model, there are in fact many contributors towards this heteronormative effect at a structural, cultural and personal level (Larsson, Redelius, and To 2011; GLAAD 2017; Scottish Government 2018).

Therefore, to avoid disadvantage or scrutiny, many in the LGBT+ community feel a pressure of performativity towards their ‘heterosexual role’ (Krais 2006). Larsson, Redelius, and To (2011) explains how heteronormativity’s binary form emphasises the embodiment of masculine or feminine features. They suggest these polarised roles are articulated through the body’s appearance, movements, and speech, to which Schilt and Westbrook (2009) further include an individual’s behaviour, expression and feeling. This is compounded in PE contexts where particular gendered habitus are accepted and encouraged in the field while others are rejected (Fitzpatrick and Enright 2016). Therefore, to mask their undesired habitus and accrue valued embodied cultural capital, the implications for gay men included a perceived need to self-regulate bodily movements and speech, pursuing a ‘macho’ physique, and to conceal their sexuality (Skeggs 2004; Clarke and Smith 2015; Einarsdottir, Hoel, and Lewis 2015). The impact of ones embodied cultural capital is further illustrated by Anderson (2011b), identifying gay men with a high athletic performance attributing this embodiment as a means of masking or mediating homosexual stigma.

Pascoe (2007) proposed that a proportion of young people are beginning to disunite from this narrow discourse, more widely accepting other forms of capital and varying habitus – representing a transition from the Avant-Guard to the Consecrated-Guard (Grenfell and James 2004). Jaklitsch (2017) suggests education is a significant enabling factor, by addressing misconceptions and intolerances that impact societal members habitus. Thus, if the collective enterprise of society’s beliefs alter so may the valued capital of a given field (Jensen 2014).

Ng et al. (2017) made similar assertions, although suggest a sense of liberalism to the point of palatability. The concept of illusio would advocate a fear that extensive acceptance of change may lead to a loss of the dominant group’s favourable position in the social hierarchy (Jensen 2014; Hilgers and Mangez 2015). Therefore, it is clear young people are still feeling constrained by the doxa and continue to navigate the heterosexual matrix (Larsson, Redelius, and To 2011). Accordingly, literature surrounding the male role, through hypermasculinities’ authority within the PE context, is explored.

Hypermasculinities

The hypermasculine environment references a dominant form of masculinities: expressed by the assertion of embodied cultural capital through features of aggression, physical power and competitiveness (Hickey 2010; Campbell et al. 2016). Through exercising this capital, women, men with alternative masculinities and those with different sexual identities are often positioned subordinately within a field’s hierarchy (Skeggs 2004; Campbell et al. 2016). Hickey (2010) explains that feelings of exclusion and anxiety in PE are often consequences for those in conflict with these dominant masculinities. Furthermore, when certain gender practices are reinforced and not disrupted, little room for other practices and pedagogies are available within the field (Fitzpatrick and McGlashan 2016).

Campbell et al. (2016) and Price and Parker (2003) more specifically indicate that to achieve superiority, an anti-homosexual discourse is common and encourages homohysteria – the knowledge that anyone could be gay and that this label is socioculturally undesirable and contrary to the field’s nomos (Anderson 2015). Therefore, those embodying atypically masculine features, that break these unwritten rules and subvert the symbolic order, habitually experience symbolic violence (Hilgers and Mangez 2015). This undermines their social position, encouraging the recognition of the nomos’ legitimacy, and further lodges the aggressor’s own superiority in the field – exemplifying the paradox of doxa, whereby the actor’s recognition that these actions could be homosexual imposes the symbolic power. However, as once again this is a taken-for-granted assumption, an individual’s autonomy to reject this doxa would only impact others if the actor held a position of dominance in that specific hierarchy (Hilgers and Mangez 2015).

Anderson (2011a) recognised the impact of these concepts throughout history. He, like others (see Anderson 2012; Campbell et al. 2016; Robinson, Anderson, and White 2018), notes a shift in the hypermasculine climate, where deviations are becoming recognised as legitimate forms of masculinities – alluding to a change in accepted habitus and valued capital in PE and YS fields. Ayoub and Garretson (2017) exhibit the positive influence the current increase in gay athletes in mainstream media has had on young people’s attitudes towards the LGBT+ community. A principal example is Stonewall’s (2017b) rainbow-laces campaign that reached over 12 million Britons supporting the message to make sport ‘everyone’s game’. However, despite a significant reduction in overt homophobia (Anderson 2011b; Stonewall 2012; 2017a), and the broader acceptance of alternative forms of masculinities embodiment, continued evidence demonstrates self-exclusion, masking behaviours, and discomfort by gay males in many sporting settings (Denison and Kitchen 2015; Fitzpatrick and McGlashan 2016: Jaklitsch 2017; Denison, Bevan, and Jeanes 2021). Therefore, while spaces for manoeuvre improve, inequity in valued embodiments of masculinities persist.

Low perceived physical competency

In addition to gay males’ perceptions of the PE context, their perceived physical competency (PPC) is cited as a common inhibiting factor, as is frequently the case among the whole population (Cardinal, Yan, and Cardinal 2013; Timo et al. 2016). While considering this barrier, gay males were found to acutely report ‘self-excluding’ as a response to low PPC, so to avoid being identified as not meeting the underlying assumption that men are good at sport (Stonewall 2017a, 15 and 28).

Actual competence may be more or less than an individual believes, so the significance rests in their understanding of possessed embodied cultural capital to empower their participation (Havitz, Kaczynski, and Mannell 2012). Furthermore, a heightened physical competency often leads to increased self-efficacy, therefore an amplified confidence to participate in PE and PA beyond the school years. In tackling this, Stonewall (2017a) identified that 72% of gay males felt more comfortable participating in a sport team advertised as inclusive, as the performance emphasis may be less.

Methodology

Research design

The significant impact marginalisation of the LGBT+ community has on young people’s PE and YS played testimony for additional study. Yet, unlike those that have come before, this investigation sought to explore the neglected insights of individuals who have successfully mitigated inhibiting factors to their engagement. Deepening our understanding of the social reality of others required researchers to deepen their understanding of themselves, and their position in the world. Researchers were reflexive in their approach to the study, recognising their role and affect, involved not merely as an observer but part of the process. Reflexive sociology, deepens our understanding of self and our position in the world, which turns methods of constructing the research object back on themselves so as to produce more accurate understanding of the social world (Fries 2009).

I am convinced that one knows the world better and better as one knows oneself better, that scientific knowledge and knowledge of oneself and of one’s own social unconscious advance hand in hand, and that primary experience transformed in and through scientific practice transforms scientific practice and conversely. (Bourdieu 2003, 289)

In order to ensure rigour and quality of the research the researchers increasingly focused on a process of ‘continual internal dialogue and critical self-evaluation of their positionality’ Mitchell et al. (2018, 678). To be aware of their social location, power, knowledge and sensitivity, by monitor biases, beliefs and personal experiences with a view to maintain balance between both research object and process (Fries 2009) and personal and universal (Berger 2015). The researchers’ position as an insider (shared believes and experiences) or outsider was important when considering the relationship between the researchers and the participants (Teh and Lek 2018). Consequently, the authors believed transparency in their own positionality, as a gay male (insider) and a straight female (outsider), was essential to best inform the reader of how their own positions benefitted this study. That is to say, the former researcher’s experience as a gay male supported a safe and empathetical environment for interviewees, while the latter researcher supported criticality of the findings to avert lodging one’s own experiences into the study.

With this implication considered, the qualitative approach of narrative inquiry was chosen, as this method emphasised participant reflection, knowledge and empowerment – thus provided a voice to, and challenged, the cultural story of this often-marginalised community (Bruner 2003). Furthermore, the scope of the data-gathering process facilitated meaningful discussion, provided a basis for strong analysis and delivered unique insights to the human experience (Creswell 2012). While critics suggest narrative inquiry is individualistic, time consuming and socially reductional (Moen 2006), Bruner (2003) explained that our lives are lived, represented and contextualised through stories, therefore through narrative processes we can make sense of the social world.

Steps outlined in Figure 1 emerged from existing work in the field and were undertaken once ethical approval was obtained. A pilot study followed with a purposively selected individual who was representative of the target study population. This allowed a rehearsal of the interview process to ensure all steps functioned as intended (Cohen, Manion, and Morrison 2007) and provided an opportunity for the researchers to run a trial data analysis.

Figure 1. The research process, adapted from Creswell (2012).

Participants

Purposive sampling was used to identify gay adult males, currently engaged with a rugby club (Cohen, Manion, and Morrison 2007). Whilst searching for participants, an inclusive rugby club, predominantly consisting of LGBT+ members, was identified as it contrasts the connotations of exclusive masculinities this sport carries (Madden 2013). Consequently, this juxtaposition was exploited to better challenge the cultural narrative of gay men in rugby and gather unique data on their PE, YS and current PA. Information on the research was shared with members of a local rugby club inclusive of the three criterion for selection. Firstly, identifies as a gay male, secondly participates in sport and lastly attended school in the UK. Three individuals (aged 21, 26 and 28) responded and subsequently participated in the research.

Data gathering

Following participant selection, interviewees chose a setting for the interview to be conducted and time was dedicated to building rapport with participants to abdicate the distorting effects of power (Karnieli-Miller and Stier 2009). After obtaining informed consent, individual semi-structured interviews were undertaken, audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, authenticated by the participant, and securely stored (Creswell 2012). A semi-structured approach was chosen as its malleable arrangement provided direction, while still encouraging a free-flowing dialog for the introduction of unpredicted themes (Lewis-Beck, Bryman, and Liao 2004).

Interviews began by participants being shown a flow chart of themes to be covered for greater informed consent and to mitigate ethical concerns, by disclosing questions of a personal nature ahead of time (Creswell 2012). Open questions were used to avoid constraining participants responses, providing enough ambiguity for them to reflect and expand on elements of the phenomenon they considered significant (Creswell 2012). Additionally, as interviews can be sites of knowledge construction, probes were used to challenge the roots of their beliefs or actions (Lewis-Beck, Bryman, and Liao 2004).

Data analysis

Analysis was grounded through the process of restoring – coding and rewriting gathered data into a chronological sequence and identifying links to this study’s underpinning social theory. The purpose of this was to add order to experiences often told out of sequence and support the researcher’s identification of explanatory links between the elements of their stories (Creswell 2012).

To create the chronology the data was coded into five elements – ‘setting, character, action, problem and resolution’– and then re-transcribed in their consecutive order between a given problem and resolution. Next, the researchers carefully combed through the events identifying their relationship with Bourdieu’s conceptual tools of field, habitus and capital. To ensure intercoder reliability, two research peers cross-checked samples to confirm labelling consistency before the chronology was amalgamated into one free flowing narrative (or story) accompanied by the discussion.

Stories and discussion

With clearly justified methods and protocols, this study now turns to the stories that emerged from Bradley, Lewis and Ruaraidh’s interviews and their subsequent analysis.

Bradley’s story

Thinking back to PE at school, it had started so well. In primary the classes were all mixed together, I was with my friends and the focus really seemed to be on making sure everyone was included, but this was short lived. I was ripped from those I felt comfortable with as they split the classes and threw me into this boy’s world. Football was the focus … week in, week out it was all we did and if you weren’t good at it then it was inevitable you were gonna get laid into.

I knew I liked boys the way I should like girls, eventually, I came across the word ‘gay’ and thought yeah that’s me, but this was so at odds with the lad culture I was stuck in with my PE class. Homophobia was just rife. If something was rubbish, it’s gay, if you made a mistake in the game, you’re a queer, if people were having a go at one another they’d call the guy a ‘fag’. I knew I didn’t have a place here. I was a fairly camp guy and didn’t like conflict, so with all this going on around me it was best to withdraw from it all, become invisible. To me PE was like maths, don’t like it but have to do it. So, I still showed up, still listened to the abuse. I know I was a pretty sensitive kid, but this was relentless, and the PE teachers did nothing. They treated it like someone had sworn, nothing about how hurtful it could be to someone like me. So, sport or coming out, any of that was just off the table.

Once I’d left school, however, I knew I needed to tell my family and some friends. To be honest I can’t fault them, was met with nothing but support. Mum was a little surprised though, still baffles me why. Anyway, it was some time till I came back to sport. I’d moved to a new city, started a new job and was just looking to get a bit fitter and make some friends. I’d always liked rugby as a sport and was a little drawn to expressing that masculine side of me too. A guy who I met at work told me about a well-known inclusive rugby club here, so I just took the plunge and went for it. Never looked back, have to say they were so welcoming and keen for new people to join. I feel safe to be myself there, something I really haven’t experienced in sport for a long time. It’s great to be included again.

Bradley’s discussion

Bradley’s story began positively, he felt included in his primary PE context, and although as Bourdieu (1977) suggested gendered expectations become entrenched during the formation of the primary habitus in early childhood, Bradley identified no structural divisions in the field of PE that Skeggs (2004) believed would amplify the formation of such characteristics. This was until secondary school.

As typified by Bourdieu (1990), the habitus of the actors within a field operates as a collective enterprise that influences the very nature of that field. Therefore, the separation from his predominantly female friendship group suggests there is a significantly reduced representation of dispositions that deviate from a masculine expectation. As a result, Bradley expressed a need to navigate the characteristics that Larsson, Redelius, and To (2011) and Schilt and Westbrook (2009) exemplified, to mask his undervalued embodied cultural capital – particularly with his sexuality in question, as this is a further atypical feature in this heteronormative discourse. While Clarke and Smith (2015) and Einarsdottir, Hoel, and Lewis (2015) described how this is often done through self-regulation of movement, speech, appearance, or shared personal knowledge, this differed for Bradley. He aligned closer to the response reported by Stonewall (2017a), expressing how homophobia’s significant presence in PE lead to his choice to withdraw, thus mitigating occasions where he may stand out.

The motivations for Bradley’s shying reaction could be explained through the concept of symbolic violence (Jensen 2014). He recognises the homophobic language and those spouting it as holding a dominant position, this acceptance legitimises their dominance leading him to accept the doxa of the field. Although Bradley does not alone possess the capital (and therefore influence) to change the nomos of his PE class, the teacher may. However, they too feed into its reproduction by not taking seriously action against such language. Illusio may explain these actions if the doxa of the field positively impacted the teacher (Grenfell and James 2004). However, a more plausible explanation could have stemmed from the understanding that fields impact subsequent fields (Hilgers and Mangez 2015). Therefore, previously imposed legislation, such as Section 28, may continue to have lasting scars as teachers feel constrained in their actions to mitigate homophobic language (Epstein 2000). Alternatively, the vast majority of homophobia is reportedly experienced in PE’s hidden spaces (for example changing rooms) where a reduced presence lessens teachers’ awareness of homophobia (Stonewall 2012; Landi 2019b).

Despite these negative PE experiences, Bradley found his way into sport. Through a Bourdieuian lens, this transition may be understood as a desire to build his physical and social capital following his move to a new city. Furthermore, the context he achieved this within is particularly interesting, as unlike his school experiences, it placed value on participation and ensuring those joining felt safe and welcomed. Similar to more than 72% of gay male respondents in Stonewall’s (2012, 17) report, this inclusive value could be seen to align closer to Bradley’s beliefs, which would suggest he would be more favourably positioned within this club’s hierarchy (Bourdieu 1989).

Following Bradley’s discussion, it is clear that the gendered segregation had a significant impact for him, by reinforcing a heteronormative discourse that created feelings of exclusion and stigmatisation due to his habitus not meeting the gendered expectations. Therefore, PE teachers may need to consider the appropriateness of this decision and how mixed classes may be a simple structural change to mitigate these events.

Lewis’s story

I was never really a ‘sporty’ kid, but early in high school I had a huge growth-spurt above the rest of my year, so naturally my family were badgering me to get into rugby. I kept shrugging it off until we played it in PE, and with my size, I ended up bulldozing through everyone and gained a wee spark of confidence. That night, two guys from my class chapped on the door and asked me to come along to the local club they played for, so I joined them. Following that first session I fell in love, the physicality of it was great and after a while, with some convincing from my PE teacher, I played for the school team too. We even won the bowl for the league we played in.

Speaking candidly my PE teacher, my coaches and even most of my teammates really pushed me to keep staying involved, I guess they really had no idea about how terrified I was. Terrified before games, before training, before changing. Feeling sick to the stomach that I might be outed and exposed as this imposter. See, since the end of primary school I’d been questioning my sexuality and as I got deeper into rugby, I got more and more certain that these two things just weren’t compatible. Even when I was like the biggest guy, I could be a little effeminate, so as you would imagine people took the piss. Well, anything that wasn’t like your stereotypical ‘macho’ kind of action would get picked out and made fun off. So, I always tried to mask or compensate for that part of me. The coaches did feed into it a little, they’d say ‘don’t be a girl’ or let players call each other a poof and that. To make it worse, my teammates grew too, now towering over me, so at 17 I called it quits. Uni was on the horizon and I just looked forward to grabbing this fresh start.

Over time, after school, my confidence did grow. My family and friends knew I was gay, and I felt more comfortable in my own skin. With a little push, I joined my first inclusive rugby team. It had a pretty big social focus, so was great getting involved and feeling part of it straight away without having to hide anything. I was part of the committee that ran it and had the chance to compete on the world stage. After moving cities, I joined a different club, that was pretty well established, and the opportunities just keep coming. The best thing though, is that I’ve seen the impossible happen – not just gay people and rugby co-existing, but together being celebrated.

Lewis’s discussion

Lewis’s early growth-spurt in high school developed features that aligned with how Hickey (2010) and Campbell et al. (2016) believed dominant masculinities were physically expressed. Lewis attributed early success with rugby in the PE setting to his increase in size, and through this story alluded to how the school and local rugby team highly value this embodied expression of masculinities. Through a Bourdieuian perspective it could be suggested that the school and club’s fields highly valued this embodied cultural capital, which Lewis so prominently presented, and it was therefore this embodiment that sparked his classmates to encourage him to join the team (Hilgers and Mangez 2015). This triggered the question of whether these experiences would have occurred without such capital as Anderson (2011b) suggests, particularly as once his peers grew, a decrease in his embodied cultural capital can be sensed.

Although Lewis’s physicality facilitated his introduction to rugby, these fields were convoluted, as exclaimed by his gut-wrenching fear experienced while comprehending these complexities. Steck and Perry (2018) suggested being gay was considered an atypical feature of masculinities that Skeggs (2004) explains can be used to position individuals with these habitus in subordinate positions in a social hierarchy. Anderson (2012) proposed these orthodox masculinities are phasing out of rugby for more inclusive forms. However, Lewis’s experiences had not aligned with this. Rather it had more closely adhered to Price and Parker (2003) discussion of homohysteria, as Lewis indicated how this anti-homosexual discourse influenced his decision to either mask his effeminate behaviours, overcompensate for them to conform to the field’s doxa, or by leaving the field entirely.

Lewis left youth rugby with university on the horizon. Perhaps the relationship these settings have with more liberal views around sexuality and gender is why Lewis saw this transition as a fresh start (Robinson, Anderson, and White 2018; Anderson 2012). His experience following these school years did seem to reflect this. However, for his reengagement in sport, it was the opportunity within an inclusive rugby club and for his identity as a gay man to be celebrated alongside the sport that he found to be most influential for his current engagement– exemplified through the clubs positive and diverse publicity of their community and charity events, social meetings, international competitions, and rugby clinics. Suggesting the field of this inclusive club was populated by others with a similar habitus, therefore he was valued (Bourdieu 1977; 2002).

The development of the gay rugby culture over the past 20 years has been significant (Madden 2013), in part due to the actions that those like Lewis have gone onto take – such as committee roles as media officer and club secretary, as well as taking part internationally at the gay rugby world cup. Ayoub and Garretson (2017) and Stonewall (2017a) notes how significant representation and education are in influencing people’s views on gay males in sport. This may be due to the cultural capital that media outlets, coaches and teachers have in influencing society and therefore it is important that they carefully consider the implications of their practice (Bourdieu 1986).

Ruaraidh’s story

I think we all like to be successful, but for my coaches and PE teachers that was the be all and end all. They were drawn to success. Don’t know if they think it’s more fun teaching someone who’s good, but it really side-lined me. In their world if you had no skill, you were without worth, you were judged and either supported or left as unwanted, and this really had an impact on me. I had tried to get involved in sport, there was a local rugby team I played with for a year. I really loved rugby, and there was one coach who always made sure I got a game, but the ethos was the same. It percolated down into the players, so if you made a mistake or were in the wrong place then it was expected that a mouth full of abuse was coming your way. It didn’t stop there though, the guys were conditioned to be giving it large, being a man’s man, and I was never really like that, so I just left. But it was like this in PE too, my friend who was out as gay had a horrible time and although I thought I might be too, that whole part of me I just ignored and pushed it away. I didn’t want to have the same experiences as him.

So, in PE, my friend and I used to sit in our mediocrity, we’d poke fun at how rubbish PE was and let the clock run out on that period until we could leave. Occasionally though, they would introduce a sport that no one else had played, this was great! Finally, a more even playing field, plus it seemed like most of the class didn’t seem that invested when it wasn’t football. Unfortunately, these experiences were the rarity, and we were back to being outcasts.

The thought of being gay didn’t really come back up for me until after high school and I met someone, it felt nice not hiding this part of me and I felt, with him, confident enough to speak to my family and friends. They were so supportive and the only issue they had was not talking sooner. However, my unease to get involved in sport throughout high school definitely stopped me backing myself to try new activities. After some time, and rather unsurprisingly, I got pretty out of shape. So, I tried to get fit by going to the gym, but although this worked it was just boring. I had seen this inclusive rugby club online, but my confidence in playing was really holding me back. Luckily, they were running this boot camp, it was all about getting back involved, building confidence, and meeting some great people. I loved it and have stuck with the team ever since.

Ruaraidh’s discussion

Ruaraidh’s experience of his coach’s desire for success ‘percolating’ into his teammates illustrates Bourdieu’s (1977) argument that interaction with an environment can influence individuals’ beliefs. Therefore, despite Ruaraidh always receiving time on the pitch this was often met with abuse if he under-performed. His peers nearly exclusively seemed to value the embodied cultural capital that leads to success, and to maintain this success seemed to drive away those who weren’t up to the task (Bourdieu 1989). Ruaraidh, unfortunately, became one of these people, although Hilgers and Mangez (2015) saw habitus as open to change, its durable nature suggests this is not easy to influence. Therefore, as indicated by Cardinal, Yan, and Cardinal (2013), these negative experiences within PE and YS are likely to have had a lasting impact on Ruaraidh’s future participation decisions.

Similarities in conclusions are noted in the work of Timo et al. (2016). However, their closer look at young people’s perceived physical competency is particularly relevant for Ruaraidh. He described his time with the rugby club as making him feel worthless and incapable, and therefore not motivated or competent enough to participate. However, when the teacher introduced a new activity, it levelled the playing field to facilitate his re-engagement. The new activity may have reduced the physical capital of his peers within PE – as they too had little proficiency – therefore increasing his confidence to perform. Havitz, Kaczynski, and Mannell (2012) would refer to this as an increased sense of self-efficacy. However, the drawback was lessons such as these were unusual occurrences, therefore Ruaraidh, like a fifth of gay young people, self-excluded due to feeling their skills were inadequate to perform in PE (Stonewall 2012).

The findings of Cardinal, Yan, and Cardinal (2013) and Timo et al. (2016) seemed to ring true for Ruaraidh, as it was some time before he returned to the sport. Nevertheless, the enabling factors for him appear to stem from an opportunity that addressed this perceived physical competency. The boot camp run by the inclusive rugby club he joined created an environment with people of a similar ability and placed value on their willingness to participate. A Bourdieuian lens may suggest occupiers of this field had similar habitus to Ruaraidh – regarding what they hoped to achieve by joining in – therefore the nomos would not be at odds with his disposition. Put simply, there were no prerequisite expectations of embodied cultural capital and an absence of a divisive push for solely high performance.

Conclusion

This study’s findings emphasised the diverse and complex nature of these men’s PE, YS and current PA experiences. For Bradley, the divided environment created a sense of discomfort and exclusion, leading him to withdraw from physical activity for an extended period of time. Only once an inclusion-orientated context was presented – an environment similarly positioned to his primary PE setting – did he believe there was a root back to PA. For Lewis, his experiences in his youth appeared to have provided him with the motor competencies and game knowledge required to engage successfully with rugby throughout his life. However, the presence of an anti-homosexual discourse caused him to leave the sport until he saw an environment where both his sexuality and rugby were celebrated. Finally, for Ruaraidh, his PE and YS experiences introduced him to an activity he loved yet led to feelings of incompetency at sport and a hugely diminished confidence to re-engage. His turning point came when an inclusive rugby club introduced an initiative that gathered those with little or no foundation in the sport and developed their abilities within a welcoming, safe and judgment-free environment.

Whilst no two were the same, each encountered barriers to overcome if they were to engage in activity. In which, the themes of heteronormativity, hypermasculinities and PPC were present, and an obstacle, in at least one of the three stories. These themes respectively materialised in their stories through: gender divided classes; ill addressed, hidden or implicit homophobia by peers and coaches; and through an overtly performative and competitive environment. Consequently, from a Bordieuian lens, it appeared that each individual was continually evaluating their position in order to determine what a particular field valued and if their habitus was at odds with this value. Thus, leading them to question if they embodied a form of capital to compensate for, or whether they should mask, this incongruence. Conversely, each participant cited an enabling factor as a cornerstone to their re-engagement with PA – the inclusive rugby club – aligning with the findings of Stonewall’s (2012) report. From a Bourdieuian perspective, this was explained by these inclusive clubs withstanding a field that valued the habitus and capital of the participants – feeling their identities were accepted and celebrated.

While limitations to the sample size, age range and diversity results in the formation of no generalisable claims – which future studies should seek to address – it facilitated the generation of rich data representing how pivotal PE and YS experiences are for future PA. Therefore, these stories act not only as a catalyst for reflection, but also withstand implications for teachers to consider to better meet the needs of gay youth. These included LGBT+ education and representation, through the effective identification and challenging of homophobic behaviours as a form of prejudice in all PE spaces, as well as making visible and celebrating all identities within sporting contexts. Furthermore, considerations to what constitutes as real opportunities for participation should be made. For instance, carefully questioning whether gendered classes may be an effective structure for these pupils; exploring alternative activities or lessons with thematic or other focus beyond the physical competencies; and potentially developing links with the LGBT+ community, through school ally groups or local LGBT+ sports clubs, to gain further insights and understand what opportunities exist beyond the PE setting.

Overall, this study suggests practitioners endeavour to position themselves in the place of these young people, to understand their unique stories and how the social environment they inhabit can be debilitating, yet equally empowering. As it is through the lens which our pupils experience the world, we can better comprehend what they need to fully and enjoyably engage in physical education and youth sport.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).