No abstract

No abstract

This paper explores issues surrounding the inclusion of impaired bodies within the Paralympic Games. To achieve this aim we use empirical data gathered from semistructured interviews held with a range of Paralympic stakeholders. The background upon which this data are analyzed is a critical analysis of the International Paralympic Committee’s (IPC’s) current vision and mission. Pierre Bourdieu’s concepts of habitus and capital (Bourdieu, 1997, 1984) provide the theoretical foundation upon which the analysis takes place. Discussion centers on Paralympic stakeholders’ articulations of issues surrounding individuals with cerebral palsy and/or severe physical impairments, emanating, in part, from a desire for aesthetically pleasing sporting performances. This paper gives Paralympic stakeholders a voice, upon which the IPC and broader sporting community may choose to reflect.

In this paper components of Bourdieu’s sociological theory will be utilized to systematically outline key constituents, and the interrelated power struggles, which shape Paralympic sport. The premier Paralympic sport competition is arguably the summer Paralympic Games, a quadrennial multi-sport competition for elite athletes with specific impairments, governed by the International Paralympic Committee. This paper argues that Paralympic sport is significantly influenced, shaped and developed according to the differential resources and contestation for power between individuals and organizations that possess an interest in deriving benefit from the Paralympic Games. Firstly, this article outlines the historical development of Paralympic sport. Relevant aspects of Bourdieu’s sociological theory are then identified and utilized to generate a fresh sociologically infused interpretation of the current key constituents who together form a Paralympic field. The intention is to provide a more systematic overview of Paralympic relations, while also highlighting potential avenues for future social research.

Formal contractual agreements between the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and International Paralympic Committee (IPC) evince the closer relationship that has been negotiated in recent times between the governing bodies of the Olympic and Paralympic sporting movements. This article explores the IOC–IPC relationship using Paralympic stakeholder perspectives, gathered via semistructured interviews. Utilizing Bourdieusian theory, these insights are analyzed and highlight the complex contestation for multiple forms of capital that occurs at the intersection of Olympic and Paralympic sport. Discussion focuses on perceived similarities between the Olympic and Paralympic Movements, before considering IOC–IPC contractual and economic relationships. Finally, concerns are voiced that to market Paralympians as the same as Olympians risks marginalizing certain individuals with impairments, and alienating disabled people in general.