为轻量级赛艇辩护

IF 1.6 Q2 ETHICS Sport Ethics and Philosophy Pub Date : 2022-11-23 DOI:10.1080/17511321.2022.2148725
Jacob Giesbrecht
{"title":"为轻量级赛艇辩护","authors":"Jacob Giesbrecht","doi":"10.1080/17511321.2022.2148725","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Lightweight rowing – the most commonly used term for the weight category in rowing’s often bifurcated categorisation system – is under credible threat of being eliminated at virtually all levels of rowing in Canada and the U.S. The health concerns associated with weight loss reflect the most problematic aspects of lightweight rowing, where the acceptable limits of harm that one must tolerated in sport is brought into question. Also, such category protection seems arguably unnecessary, especially for lightweights who are nearly as competitive as their openweight counterparts. This prompts reflection on the purpose and policies behind these categories. The justification for weight categories is scant or has simply been assumed as legitimate within the status quo. In the absence of any constructive debate on the topic, I will attempt to articulate the neglected rationale for why lightweight rowing ought to exist despite its apparent problems. In doing so, suggestions for further rules and policy improvements to lightweight rowing will be identified.","PeriodicalId":51786,"journal":{"name":"Sport Ethics and Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"In Defense of Lightweight Rowing\",\"authors\":\"Jacob Giesbrecht\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17511321.2022.2148725\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Lightweight rowing – the most commonly used term for the weight category in rowing’s often bifurcated categorisation system – is under credible threat of being eliminated at virtually all levels of rowing in Canada and the U.S. The health concerns associated with weight loss reflect the most problematic aspects of lightweight rowing, where the acceptable limits of harm that one must tolerated in sport is brought into question. Also, such category protection seems arguably unnecessary, especially for lightweights who are nearly as competitive as their openweight counterparts. This prompts reflection on the purpose and policies behind these categories. The justification for weight categories is scant or has simply been assumed as legitimate within the status quo. In the absence of any constructive debate on the topic, I will attempt to articulate the neglected rationale for why lightweight rowing ought to exist despite its apparent problems. In doing so, suggestions for further rules and policy improvements to lightweight rowing will be identified.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51786,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sport Ethics and Philosophy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sport Ethics and Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17511321.2022.2148725\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sport Ethics and Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17511321.2022.2148725","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

轻量级赛艇——在赛艇通常分为两类的分类系统中,最常用的重量类别术语——在加拿大和美国几乎所有级别的赛艇中都面临着被淘汰的可信威胁。与减肥相关的健康问题反映了轻量级赛艇最具问题的方面,在这种情况下,人们在运动中必须容忍的可接受的伤害范围受到了质疑。此外,这样的类别保护似乎是不必要的,特别是对于几乎与开放量级对手一样具有竞争力的轻量级选手。这引发了对这些类别背后的目的和政策的反思。重量分类的理由是不足的,或者只是在现状下被认为是合法的。在没有任何关于这个话题的建设性辩论的情况下,我将试图阐明被忽视的理由,为什么轻量级赛艇应该存在,尽管它有明显的问题。在此过程中,将提出进一步改进轻量级赛艇规则和政策的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
In Defense of Lightweight Rowing
ABSTRACT Lightweight rowing – the most commonly used term for the weight category in rowing’s often bifurcated categorisation system – is under credible threat of being eliminated at virtually all levels of rowing in Canada and the U.S. The health concerns associated with weight loss reflect the most problematic aspects of lightweight rowing, where the acceptable limits of harm that one must tolerated in sport is brought into question. Also, such category protection seems arguably unnecessary, especially for lightweights who are nearly as competitive as their openweight counterparts. This prompts reflection on the purpose and policies behind these categories. The justification for weight categories is scant or has simply been assumed as legitimate within the status quo. In the absence of any constructive debate on the topic, I will attempt to articulate the neglected rationale for why lightweight rowing ought to exist despite its apparent problems. In doing so, suggestions for further rules and policy improvements to lightweight rowing will be identified.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
23.10%
发文量
20
期刊最新文献
Book Symposium: Alfred Archer and Jake Wojtowicz’s Why it’s OK to be a Sports Fan Fair Play Principle in Esports Be a good sport: A care ethical inquiry into sport parenting Weight in sport: changing the focus from ‘weight-sensitive sports’ to risk groups of athletes The etymological evolvement and redefinition of ‘game’
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1