This article explores the role of sport in the regulation of boys' gender nonconformity. More specifically, it looks at the way sport contributes to producing the pronounced anti-effeminacy that pervades North American culture. Sport is a huge conceptual category that captures activities as diverse as NFL football, minor league co-ed softball, and recreational jogging. Sport is something people do, and it is something people watch. It produces intense physical pleasures, yet also pain, leading to, for example, three hundred thousand concussions a year in the United States. 1 Sport is promoted as a health-giving leisure-time activity and as a big-money venture with the power to bolster urban economies and foster national pride. It has its own educational institutions, its own media, its own multinational corporations. It takes up a tremendous amount of cultural space, helping to produce and keep in circulation ideas about human physical potential, about what counts as normality, about the relation of the body to gender, race, class, and nation. For this article, the version of sport that concerns me is the mainstream commonsense ideal of sport as a taken-for-granted feature of masculine childhoods. Analytically, I take up this version of sport as not just a form of physical activity but as an ideological discursive formation that helps sustain narrow normative understandings of gender.In popular and professional discourses about effeminacy or sissyness, boys' feelings about sport (and about gym class) and their actual athletic abilities have been represented as both symptoms of abnormality and possible targets of intervention. The assumption has been that knowing something about a boy's feelings for sports tells us considerably more than that about him. Would we say the same of his feelings for math, for solving spatial puzzles, for playing chess, for