Abstract
Later this year, delegations from about 180 countries, competing in 22 sports, will converge for what is without a doubt the most high-profile sporting venue for adaptive-sport competition: the Paralympics. The 2024 Paris Games will likely be the largest-ever showcase for elite athletes with a disability in history. Furthermore, parity among competing nations has increased, as witnessed by a record-number of countries taking home at least one medal from the 2021 Tokyo Paralympics; gender parity has also increased, with twice as many female competitors as were part of the Paralympics in Sydney less than a quarter-century ago (International Paralympic Committee, 2023).
Elite adaptive-sport competition has gained tremendous momentum in recent years. The Paralympic Games were seen to have reached new levels of visibility with their success in the London 2012 Games, when a record-setting 2.7 million tickets were sold (International Paralympic Committee, 2023). The increased momentum has been fueled in part by a number of factors, including public awareness as a result of documentaries such as “Rising Phoenix” (2020), and the advocacy of public figures including Prince Harry, founder of the Invictus Games for wounded veterans. Media conglomerates such as NBCUniversal have also invested in increased programming around the Paralympic Games (Huver, 2023). In 2024, a record 1500 hours of programming will be offered by NBC/Peacock, including daily live programming (NBC Sports, 2023). And, like their able-bodied counterparts, adapted-sport athletes have also attracted news coverage for controversial off-the-field exploits (including doping and convictions for violent crimes), and for the geo-political dimensions of their sport participation. In 2022, the International Paralympic Committee reversed course when it drew calls for a boycott of its Winter Games after planning to allow Russian athletes to compete just days after Russia invaded the Ukraine. It narrowly voted in fall 2023 to allow Russian Paralympians to compete as “neutral” athletes in Paris, ahead of a similar decision by the IOC regarding Olympic athletes (Grohman, 2023). Since 1988, the Olympics has taken place in the same host city one month before the Paralympic Games.
More so than the Olympics, the Paralympics are often seen as a “human rights movement” – an opportunity to shine a spotlight on rights and access in the host city and as a forum to encourage broader participation in wellness activities by people with disabilities (PWD) (“Exploring how,” 2021). Host cities are expected to invest in improving infrastructure to increase accessibility and in athletics facilities and programs (International Paralympic Committee, 2023). Even so, according to research, these efforts often fall short of improving the health outcomes of PWD. For instance, after the 2012 London Paralympics, sport participation fell by people with disabilities, whose participation rates are already less than half of the rest of the population. Brown (2022) makes the case that London made the same mistake made by other host cities: failing to leverage the Paralympics to improve the lives of residents, by adequately putting into place opportunities and resources to allow PWD access to organized physical activities after the Games finish.
Brown also rightly argues that part of the reason for lagging sport participation by PWD – besides the many hurdles they face related to affordability and access – is the persistence of tropes that position sport participation for PWD as an endeavor requiring super-human attributes. (For instance, a 2016 Rio Paralympic Games’ promotion was themed “We’re the Superhumans.”) Research published in Communication & Sport over the years has documented this “supercrip” theme; athletes are positioned less as role models for sports participation and more as “inspiration porn” for able-bodied spectators (Cherney et al., 2015; Grue, 2016; Huver, 2023). Such depictions seem to be desirable even in the most genuine attempts in recent years to raise awareness of adaptive sport. An example is in the acclaimed documentary “Rising Phoenix.” The filmmaker, Ian Bonhôte, intentionally framed the athletes as superheroes (“Exploring how,” 2021). It is no surprise that some Paralympians, he reported, “were particularly uncomfortable with it. ‘They just wanted to be seen as normal’” (para. 5). This echoes the sentiments of those who find themselves as outsiders in the sports ecosystem: the female athlete, gay athlete, or Paralympic athlete would all generally wish that the adjective modifier be eliminated.
Their instincts should not be ignored. Research indicates that the “inspirational” framing of Paralympians may be attractive to non-disabled consumers but is ultimately detrimental to the adaptive-sports and disability-rights movements because it frames achievement as “in spite of” the disabled identity (Silva & Howe, 2012; Braye et al., 2013). In such a guise, the “winners just by competing” narrative makes the “winners by finishing first” narrative needlessly convoluted.
In other words: Visibility alone is not enough to increase understanding, remove barriers, and, ultimately, improve the lives of PWD. It is the type of visibility that adaptive sports receive. Thus, we must continue to interrogate coverage of and discourse around the sports and the athletes who compete. We are grateful for the ongoing critical inquiry published over the years in this journal, including the four articles you will find within this issue. Decades ago, the thru-line for adaptive sport pertained to why media was not paying attention; now, that primary narrative has shifted to the interrogation of what happens once the media gaze is more fixed on a PWD. We feel confident the selections in this issue attend to that necessary nuance.