Hello, I am looking for someone to write an essay on Their bottoms are the wrong shape The theory of established outsider relations and female jockeys. It needs to be at least 750 words.Download file

Hello, I am looking for someone to write an essay on Their bottoms are the wrong shape The theory of established outsider relations and female jockeys. It needs to be at least 750 words.

Download file to see previous pages…

The argument that women riders are “outsiders” within the racing figuration is derived from Elias’ theory of established and outsider relations and the method chosen for the study is a s series of eight semi-structured interviews with female jockeys who are already established in their careers. The article starts with a quotation from a female jockey who professes to hate being referred to as a “female jockey” and this highlights the tension that exists in the minds of many professional women who find themselves a focus of extra attention just because their gender is different from the large majority of participants in a certain field. The historical and cultural dominance of masculinity in sport generally encourages this tendency and racing is quite typical in this respect. Citing Cassidy (2002) and Grimes and Ray (1995) the authors demonstrate that vertical gender segregation is a feature of employment in the sport of racing, with women occupying the majority of low status roles, such as groom, while the higher status roles are generally occupied by men. The existence of male-only trainers is cited as another example of the systematic exclusion of women from prestigious roles, with the direct consequence that women obtain fewer mounts than their male counterparts. After this anecdotal introduction there is a discussion of theoretical concepts such as social habitus, insider and outsider, group disgrace and group charisma. The term “habitus” is drawn again from Elias, rather than Bourdieu, and defined as “second nature” (Van Krieken, 1998, p. 47) or “the level of personality characteristics which individuals share in common with fellow members of their group” (Mennell, 1992, p. 30). The authors emphasise a collective view of habitus, in terms of the way a whole society develops over time, again following Elias, rather than the more personal, psychogenic approach of Bourdieu, although both psychogenic and sociogenic aspects in habitus are recognised as important. The concept of power is discussed in terms of its relational and processual role, as a constant factor in all human relationships. Here again, the collective aspects are highlighted, and the authors cite the example of group power relations between an estate and a village in the work of Elias and Scotson (1964/1994). The terms “insider” and “outsider” describe not just the physical location of these two groups, but the differences that they perceive in their own role, and the power relationship that exists between the two. The power differences in the Elias and Scotson study was internalised by both groups, so that the insider villagers developed a positive “group charisma” image while the outsider estate inhabitants internalised a largely negative we-image. This is accepted by Velija and Flynn as a valid model which can be applied to other types of interdependent groups in a figuration, including contexts such as gender relations. A number of studies are cited to demonstrate the outsider groups tend to identify with the insider group rather than with each other and that acceptance of inferior status was generally accepted by the outsider group. The work of Ernst (2003) shows that in sport women can be categorised as outsiders and that they generally have less confidence than men, and are judged both differently and more severely. These patterns are deep seated, and even when organisational change is introduced such as in the merger of women’s and men’s cricket organisations in England and Wales, the established power relations and self-images remain (Velija and Malcolm, 2009).

Leave a Reply