In light of the decision to cut women's ski jumping from the Olympics and female park skiers from the Dew Tour we thought this position paper by Dylan Fisher would be fitting. Please send any feedback to leah@shejumps.com. —Leah Fielding, Associate Editor

A Fight For Equality; The IOC’s Unethical Practices Called into Question

by Dylan Fisher

In 776 B.C., the first Olympic games were held in Greece. Women were not allowed to compete in the games so they held their own competition. It was known as the Games of Hera, which honored the Greek goddess of women and earth. In 396 B.C., a Spartan princess won an Olympic chariot race, but was banned from receiving her prize in person simply because she was a woman. The first modern Olympics were held in 1896 in Athens, Greece. Women weren’t allowed to compete because the founder and president of the International Organizing Committee (IOC), Baron Pierre de Coubertin, felt it would be "impractical, uninteresting, unaesthetic, and incorrect." By 1900 eleven women were allowed to compete in lawn tennis and golf.  In 1949 men’s ski jumping was grandfathered into the Olympics. By 1968, women only had 12 events compared to the men’s 21 in the winter Olympics and 39 events to the men’s 122 in the summer games.[1] By 1998, women’s ice hockey was included in the winter Olympics, which led to an “explosion of participation” in the program. In November 2006, the IOC decided not to include women’s ski jumping in the Olympic Program.[2] In 2010,the IOC is still discriminating against women. Women have come so far in the fight for equality, yet today they are still facing open and blatant discrimination in a globally recognized event.

Ski jumping is the only winter Olympic event that does not have both men’s and women’s competitions. The IOC claims that the sport is not “sufficiently developed to be included in the Games,”[3] yet other less or equally developed sports have been added to the Olympic Program in recent years. These dedicated female ski jumpers have shown that they are world-class athletes that deserve to have a spot in the Olympic Program and are victims of gender discrimination at the hands of the IOC. Through a court case against the Vancouver Organizing Committee for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games (VANOC) these women hoped to gain rightful access to the most prestigious sporting event in the world. Unfortunately, on November 13, 2009, the Canadian justice system failed these women and women all over the world in the fight for equality and did not rule in their favor. The IOC has proven itself again, to be a biased and corrupt organization that is seemingly above the law. They are supposed to stand for and uphold the ‘Olympic tradition,’ but their actions related to this matter have done anything but that. Due to the fact the IOC will not allow these women to participate they’ve become an organization that does not foster the true Olympic spirit and should be held accountable for their unethical and discriminatory practices.

Since the inception of ski jumping women have been participating, often disguised as men. It wasn’t until the 1980’s that women began to emerge more openly into the sport. Women were allowed to compete in the men’s competitions during certain events, but were often held to jump before or after the actual competition had occurred. In 1998, the International Federation of Skiing (FIS) finally established a women’s circuit of competition during the Junior Championships in St. Moritz.[4] By establishing an international competition the women finally had a chance to be seen as elite athletes that deserved organized competitions, just like the boys. In 2009, American Lindsay Van became the first world champion by winning the inaugural women’s event in the FIS Nordic World Ski Championships held in Liberec Germany.[5] Although many monumental changes have occurred in the few short years women’s ski jumping has been prevalent, there are still many hurdles to overcome before the sport will be given the respect it deserves. The IOC has long remained the main obstacle in the further development of the sport.

              The IOC is a private entity based out of Switzerland that is “the supreme authority of the Olympic movement.”[6]  Although there are many smaller committees, IOC members often hold more than one position on different committees giving them omni-jurisdiction over the games. They are essentially in control of every facet of the Olympics. The Olympic Charter is the official document governing all aspects of the Olympics from the committees to the athletes. The Charter states in the Fundamental Principles of Olympism, “The goal of Olympism is to place the sport at the service of harmonious development of man, with a view promoting a peaceful society concerned with the preservation of human dignity… The practice of sport is a human right. Every individual must have the possibility of practicing sport, without any discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity, and fair play… Any form of discrimination with regards to a country or a person on the grounds of race, religion, politics, gender or otherwise is incompatible with the IOC and recognition by the IOC.[7]” These principles make up what is referred to as the Olympic tradition or spirit, and any violation of these principles is a travesty to very essence of the Olympics. Ironically, it is the IOC, the sole group in charge of upholding and defending the Olympic tradition, that is explicitly defying the Charter and Olympic spirit by practicing blatant discrimination. Their actions are in clear contradiction of what they claim to stand for. Also in the Charter is an extensive list detailing the duties of the IOC. Among the duties listed are; to encourage and support the promotion of ethics in sport as well as education of youth through sport and to dedicate its efforts to ensuring that, in sport, the spirit of fair play prevails and violence is banned, to act against any form of discrimination affecting the Olympic Movement, to encourage and support the promotion of women in sport at all levels and in all structures with a view to implementing the principle of equality of men and women, and to encourage and support the development of sport for all.[8] The members are also required to take an oath stating, “ I undertake to serve the Olympic Movement to the very best of my ability; to respect and ensure the respect of all the provisions of the Olympic Charter… to comply with the Code of Ethics…to fight against all other forms of discrimination; and to promote in all circumstances the interests of the International Olympic Committee and those of the Olympic Movement.”[9] Again, the IOC’s actions are going against the fundamental values they claim to stand for. Although these duties are explicitly laid out in the Charter, the IOC seemed to completely disregard their duties when they prohibited females from jumping in the 2010 Winter Games. The Charter also states that all decisions of the IOC are final and may only be disputed through the Court of Arbitration for Sport, an entity of the IOC[10]. In 1999, The Code of Ethics was implemented laying out even more explicitly what was acceptable and what was not. Unfortunately, the Ethics Commission is another organ of the IOC and states “Referrals to the Ethics Commission (the Commission) are made in writing to the IOC President.[11]” This is problematic because the president of the IOC, Jacques Rogues, is among those engaging in the unethical and discriminatory behavior.  The consequences for failing to comply with the Code of Ethics for members of the IOC and any Olympic ‘participants’ are “reprimand, pronounced by the IOC Executive Board,” or “Suspension, for a specific period, pronounced by the IOC Executive Board.[12]” All of this goes to show that the IOC has ensured that they cannot be challenged and have absolute power over the Olympic Movement. The policies of the IOC parallel the policies of a tyrannical regime that does not allow for any sort of balance of power. They leave no room for criticism and are completely unchallengeable. If any problem arises, it goes to the IOC Executive Board and the IOC President. No other organ or committee has the power to challenge the IOC or rule that their behaviors are not in accordance with the Olympic Charter. They are simply in control of too much to have a fair and balanced organization, and are severely abusing their powers in this situation. They cannot be legally challenged beyond their own jurisdiction and have no unbiased or objective parties to keep them in line and honest. We can see why the IOC hasn’t been held accountable within the Olympic movement, but it’s difficult to understand how they can so blatantly defy and tarnish Olympic tradition with absolutely no ramifications from society. As there is no governing body above the IOC, they have given themselves absolute power. Moralist and historian Lord Acton wrote in 1887, “power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.[13]” This is something we have seen through the course of history in many governments and organizations, the IOC is no exception to this phenomenon.

The process for adding to the Olympic Program is also explained in the Olympic Charter. The process to include a new sport, discipline, or event in the Olympics is different from many other governing organizations in all spheres because it is very vague. Up until recently, Rule 47 §3.2 and 3.3, more commonly know as the Universality Rule stated; “events must have a recognized international standing both numerically and geographically, and have been included at least twice in the world or continental cup… Only events practiced by men in at least fifty countries and on three continents, and by women in at least thirty-five countries and on three continents, may be included in the Olympic games.”[14] Also included in Rule 47 §4.4 was the Tradition Exception, which stated; “Sports, disciplines, or events included in the program of the Olympic Games which no longer satisfy the criteria of this rule may nevertheless, in certain exceptional cases, be maintained therein by decision of the IOC for the sake of the Olympic tradition.”[15] Many of the sports in the Winter Olympics did not meet the criteria under Rule 47, but were added to the Olympic Program using the Tradition Exception. The Olympic Charter was redone in 2007 and Rule 47 was removed and replaced with Rule 46 “The decision to include a discipline or event in the program falls within the competence of the IOC Executive Board.”[16] Even though Rule 47 is no longer included in the Charter it is still sporadically applied in practice within the ‘discretion’ of the IOC. This created another decision that is left solely to the executive board of the IOC and the Olympic Program Commission (OPC). According to Lindsay Van, usually the governing body of a particular sport, in this case the FIS, will recommend to the IOC that a sport be added to the program and they will usually accept that recommendation[17]. The course of adding either a sport, event, or discipline to the Olympic program usually follows a similar path of one another. First and foremost, they must be recognized and governed by an international federation (IF) that insures the sport follows the Olympic Charter. The FIS is the governing body for skiing and related sports, including ski jumping. The sport, event, or discipline in question must also be widely practiced around the world and have established international competition. The difference between sports, disciplines, and events is simple. Sports are the specific sports governed by the international federation, the disciplines are branches of each sport, and the events are competitions within the sport or discipline.[18] For example, skiing is the sport, ski jumping is the discipline, and an event would be “Women’s Individual Normal Hill.” If a sport, event, or discipline meet the criteria and are sufficiently developed, then it is up to the IF to vote to recommend it be added to the program. If it passes the vote, the IF will send a recommendation to the IOC. Then that recommendation will be reviewed by the OPC and if they see fit, will recommend it be added to the Olympics. Although this seems like a rigorous and thus fair process, we have learned that it is not. There are no solid merits or reasons one sport, discipline, or event should be added over another. The same standards are not applied equally to all sports. When standards and criteria are not applied equally they are inherently unfair and are discriminatory by nature. There needs to be logic and reason involved in any governing body, especially one that holds the power and clout of the Olympics. The IOC is able to arbitrarily govern the Olympics and choose what qualifies as Olympic worthy with no boundaries or consequence to their actions. By not applying rules equally, the credibility of the Olympics is washed away. The fundamentals of competition, which are at the very heart of the games, no longer have the same meaning when an unethical organization such as the IOC governs them.  Without solid criteria that are applied equally to all sports, disciplines, and events the Olympic Games become as arbitrary as the rules that govern them.

There have been many myths used to disguise the blatant discrimination of the IOC against women’s ski jumping. The main myths are; the level of participation in the sport is not sufficient, the talent level is not equal to or comparable to the men, there is not enough time to host a women’s event, it would be too costly to hold a women’s event, and the honor of winning a medal would be diluted by the inclusion of women’s ski jumping[19]. WSJ2010.com is a website dedicated to the inclusion of women’s ski jumping in the Olympics and debunks many of these myths simplistically. To address the first two myths, there are over 130 women from 18 nations registered with the FIS and hundreds more competing at lower levels. Women’s ski jumping is included in the FIS’s Continental Cup Tour and 35 different athletes from nine nations have placed in the top ten of the Continental Cup. The FIS also now includes women in the World Championships. These statistics parallel the men’s ski jumping statistics and show that the participation, level of talent, and overall sport is sufficiently developed to be a part of the Olympic Program. The notion that there is not enough time, room, or money to include women in the 2010 Games is also false. The men’s events are planned over six days, a single women’s event could easily be added to the program on a day the men’s events aren’t held or before or after on the same days. This would cause little to no serious hassle to the IOC or any other Olympic entities. The venue and jumping hills that would be used for the women’s event have already been built for the men’s events and the money has already been spent. There would be no need for modification, and opening the venue for one more event would not significantly impact the cost. There is room and no serious financial set back to hold a women’s event, and the benefits of not blatantly discriminating against women would simply outweigh the minor costs. Depriving someone of the human right of equality and practicing the very thing you preach against is simply wrong and unethical. The so-called legitimate reasons the IOC has been hiding behind have fallen under scrutiny and have been shown to be completely illegitimate. Unless the IOC can come up with legitimate reasons that are true, their actions are discriminatory and have no place anywhere near the Olympic Games.

When the OPC denied the FIS’s recommendation to add female ski jumping to the Olympic Program they stated it was due to the sport not being sufficiently developed internationally and not meeting ‘technical merits.’ Although according to the Charter, there are no specific technical merits in order for a sport to be added, thus their second reason is immediately questionable. If the technical merits in question were those in the former Rule 47, both men and women’s ski jumping fall short by about the same criteria. The females have registered athletes in 18 countries, which meet 52% and the males have registered athletes from 29 countries, which meet 58% of the Universality requirement[20]. The comparison of men’s ski jumping on the big hill (120-meter jump) versus the female’s ski jumping on the normal hill (90-meter jump) also shows the equality of the sports. In men’s ski jumping, 12 nations have medaled in 127 events and in women’s ski jumping, nine nations have medaled in 91 events[21]. Both men and women’s ski jumping have very similar statistics and they both fall short of the ‘technical merits’ by about the same degree. Why then were the men grandfathered into the Olympic Program but the IOC still refuses to let women participate? The Tradition Exception is disparate impact discrimination, which means that it is not discriminatory prima facie, but is inherently discriminatory. “Women do not have the advantage of the Olympic tradition exception because historical stereotyping and prejudice prevented women from participating in ski jumping in sufficient numbers…Rule 47(4.4) perpetuates the effect of that prejudice and is, therefore, discriminatory.”[22] There have been many societal headwinds that have factored into the development of women’s ski jumping. Professor Vertinksy has studied women’s ski jumping extensively, and was an expert witness in the Sagen v. VANOC case. She stated that historically, ski jumping was seen as inappropriate for women. It was thought to be medically inappropriate as women were assumed to be “more frail” than their male counterparts. Due to these views there was a lack of sanctioned events, which directly led to reduced numbers of participation until the late 90’s. Overcoming these societal stigmas and developing women’s ski jumping to the level it is at today should be viewed as an epic success and encouraged by the IOC and not shot down. When the FIS voted to recommend the inclusion of women’s ski jumping, it passed with an overwhelming vote of 114-1.[23] How could the IOC, who almost always accepts recommendations from governing bodies, reject a vote that one-sided? Is the IOC afraid to change something that holds so much tradition? Is tradition the only factor the IOC is really considering? Possibly the most damning evidence to the IOC’s claim that they are not being discriminatory is the following example. The hill the men will be competing on in Vancouver is the 90-meter ‘normal hill.’ An American ski jumper currently holds the longest distance and overall point record on that hill, yet this jumper will not be able to compete in the 2010 Vancouver Games. Why, one may shockingly ask? Because she is a woman, and that is the only reason. Lindsay Van has proven to be a better jumper than the boys in this case, but apparently all of her dedication and clear elite level of talent is not good enough. The IOC is telling her that, although she has exceeded the level of her male counterparts in this instance, she is not good enough to compete in the Olympic Games. All of this evidence leads us to critically question the IOC’s genuine motives. What are the real reasons for not allowing women to ski jump? Clearly, it is not the level of international competition, nor the lack of development, nor the lack of talent. What then, is the real reason?

The IOC has been referred to as an “Ol’ Boys Club” for generations. Lindsay Van commented on why she thinks the IOC won’t allow her to jump in an interview with the New York Times, “I think because ski jumping is such an old sport. It’s the oldest sport in the Winter Olympics, from the original 1924 Olympics. It’s always been a male-dominated, very traditional sport and European dominated. A bunch of old men run it who don’t want it changed. I think they are scared of girls putting an impact on the sport and getting some attention they feel should go to the guys and take some of the extreme value away. I just don’t think they’re ready for it. I think they’re stuck and they’re not willing to move forward at all.”[24] The historical factors involved with ski jumping could be a major factor in why there is so much opposition to adding the women’s event, but they do not excuse the IOC’s discrimination. The vote in the FIS had only one member vote against the inclusion of a women’s event and has also raised some questions. Who was this one person and what did they have against the women jumping? Apparently 114 qualified people considered the sport sufficiently developed and only one did not. Walter Seiber is one man that has openly voiced his opposition to women’s inclusion. He also serves on VANOC and is vice-president of the Canadian Olympic Committee.[25] How can one man in the public eye not be held accountable for open gender discrimination? Where are the Canadian people who are well recognized for and long have fought for equality? Where is the sense social responsibility we have as members of society to speak out against these travesties? We have to ask ourselves how a sexist man was allowed to hold two very powerful positions on the organizing committees? People like Walter Seiber and Jacques Rogge, the IOC president, with unethical views and standards should not be in positions of such great power. It is socially irresponsible to continue to allow these kinds of people to have such great influence in our society and the organization of the Olympic Games. The Olympic Games hold a certain valor and honor among the global community. They foster a sense of peace and friendly competition. Wars are put on hold and countries that are at each other’s throats come together to celebrate in the spirit of the Olympics. Yet we are allowing the Olympics to be tarnished and disgraced. One would think that such a symbolic and monumental event would be held to the highest standards and those responsible for organizing it would be held to the same standards. By allowing the IOC to disgrace the Olympic spirit we are critically wounding the credibility and true symbol of the Olympic Games.

It’s easy to see that the IOC has no legitimate reasons for not allowing women’s ski jumping to be held as an Olympic event. They are a group of old men who are stuck in their ways and simply won’t let the girls play. We as a society, have an obligation to stand up against this inequality and demand the IOC be held responsible for and put an end to these discriminatory practices. If the British Columbia justice system won’t hold them responsible, society must. The IOC has shown that its power apparently extends beyond ‘mere’ reach of the law, but does it extend beyond society’s judgment? Will our society show its intelligence, compassion, and need for justice? Or will we stand idly by and watch this travesty continue? I know that this situation has fatally undermined the credibility and sacredness of the Olympic spirit in my eyes, and should have the same effect on any just and moral person. Now is the time to realize our social responsibility to make the IOC accountable for their actions, repair the damages done, and return the valor and honor the Olympic Games deserve.

Works Cited

Acton, John Emerich Edward Dalberg. Letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton. 1887. Phrase Finder. Web. 25 Oct. 2009. <http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/288200.html>.

International Olympic Committee. Ethics. Lausanne, Switzerland: The International Olympic Committee, Nov. 2009. 1-137. Web. 20 Oct. 2009.

International Olympic Committee. The Olympic Charter. Lausanne, Switzerland: The International Olympic Committee, July. 2007. 1-104. Web. 20 Oct. 2009.

"The International Olympic Committee." Official Website of the Olympic Movement. IOC. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. <http://www.olympic.org/en/content/The-IOC/>.

"Ladies-Skijumping.com: History of the ladies ski jumping." Ladies Ski Jumping - Ladies-Skijumping.com. Apr. 2008. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. <http://www.ladiesskijumping.com/pokaz.php?show=historia>.

"Lindsey Van- Women's Ski Jumping in 2010." Telephone interview. 15 Oct. 2009.

Sagen v. VANOC. Supreme Court of British Columbia. 10 July 2009. Print.

Ross, Shmuel. "Olympics Timeline." Infoplease: Encyclopedia, Almanac, Atlas, Biographies, Dictionary, Thesaurus. Infoplease.com. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. <http://www.infoplease.com/spot/olympicstimeline.html>.

"Should Women Be Allowed To Ski Jump In The 2010 Olympics?" LET WOMEN SKI JUMP IN 2010! Web. 21 Oct. 2009. <http://www.wsj2010.com>.

Zinser, Lynn. "Q. & A. With the Ski Jumper Lindsey Van." New York Times 23 Oct. 2009. New York Times. Nytimes.com, 23 Oct. 2009. Web. 25 Oct. 2009.

[1] Ross, Shmuel. "Olympics Timeline." Infoplease: Encyclopedia, Almanac, Atlas, Biographies, Dictionary, Thesaurus. Infoplease.com. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. <http://www.infoplease.com/spot/olympicstimeline.html>.

[2] Sagen v. VANOC. Supreme Court of British Columbia. 10 July 2009. Print.

[3] Sagen 29.

[4] "Ladies-Skijumping.com: History of the ladies ski jumping." Ladies Ski Jumping - Ladies-Skijumping.com. Apr. 2008. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. <http://www.ladiesskijumping.com/pokaz.php?show=historia>.

[5] Ladies Ski Jumping

[6] ^{"The International Olympic Committee." Official Website of the Olympic Movement. IOC. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. <http://www.olympic.org/en/content/The-IOC/>.}

[7] ^{International Olympic Committee. The Olympic Charter. Lausanne, Switzerland: The International Olympic Committee, July. 2007. 11. Web. 20 Oct. 2009.}

[8] ^{The Olympic Charter 14.}

[9] ^{The Olympic Charter 30.}

[10] ^{The Olympic Charter 104.}

[11] ^{International Olympic Committee. Ethics. Lausanne, Switzerland: The International Olympic Committee, Nov. 2009. 30. Web. 20 Oct. 2009.}

[12] Ethics 76.

[13] ^{Acton, John Emerich Edward Dalberg. Letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton. 1887. Phrase Finder. Web. 25 Oct. 2009. <http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/288200.html>.}

[14] ^{Sagen 28.}

[15] ^{Sagen 29.}

[16] ^{The Olympic Charter 87.}

[17] ^{"Lindsey Van- Women's Ski Jumping in 2010." Telephone interview. 15 Oct. 2009.}

[18] ^{The Olympic Charter 86.}

[19] ^{All of the information in this paragraph was obtained from www.wsj2010.com.}

^{"Should Women Be Allowed To Ski Jump In The 2010 Olympics?" LET WOMEN SKI JUMP IN 2010! Web. 21 Oct. 2009. <http://www.wsj2010.com>.}

[20] ^{Sagen 29-30.}

[21] ^{Sagen 30.}

[22] ^{Sagen 30.}

[23] ^{Lindsey Van}

[24] ^{Zinser, Lynn. "Q. & A. With the Ski Jumper Lindsey Van." New York Times 23 Oct. 2009. New York Times. Nytimes.com, 23 Oct. 2009. Web. 25 Oct. 2009.}

[25] ^{Sagen 29.}