Conclusion

• Pages: 159-163
• Published date: 28 September 2018
• Date: 28 September 2018
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-78743-753-120181006
• Author: Helen Jefferson Lenskyj University of Toronto, Canada

CONCLUSION

Eighteen years ago, in the final chapter of my first book on

the Olympic industry (Lenskyj, 2000, p. 195), I wrote, ‘[…]

people who enjoy sport and value democracy would be ill-

advised to support any aspect of the Olympics […] their ener-

gies and talents would be better directed towards other

regional, national and international sporting competitions

that are currently conducted in more ethical and less exploit-

ative ways.’Events of the last 18 years have done nothing to

change my position on these issues, nor have my current find-

ings on gender, sports law and CAS.

As in other sectors of society, women and members of eth-

nic minorities are generally more vulnerable than their white

male counterparts to the vagaries of sports law, most notably

its lack of transparency, unpredictability, constraints on

access to domestic courts, the strict liability principle, and

forced arbitration. Furthermore, the racism, sexism and

homophobia underlying the mistreatment and abuse of

gender-variant women at the hands of sport administrators

and health professionals is a human rights issue that must be

addressed. For their part, the mass media have largely collab-

orated with the Olympic industry to promote sport excep-

tionalism, while condemning ‘drug cheats’and female

athletes who are ‘not woman enough.’

159