Gender discrimination remains a good sized challenge in Indian sports activities, deeply entrenched in Its societal norms. Stereotypes, societal pressures, and biases restrict women’s participation, reflecting broader cultural issues. Recent controversies surrounding influential figures in sports governance highlight systemic challenges, with allegations of sexual harassment exposing vulnerabilities inside carrying institutions. 

Instances such as the case in opposition to Brij Bhushan Singh, a outstanding discern in Indian politics and wrestling, shed light on the complexities faced with the aid of athletes. Allegations of sexual harassment and next legal lawsuits underscore the challenges of that, in search of justice within the complex atmosphere. The election of officials have been done carefully,that is  related to accused individuals, no matter how many  protests occur from famous athletes like Sakshi Malik and Bajrang Punia. The intertwining of sports and law in India portrays a panorama barred by using systemic challenges, societal biases, and power struggles, urging the need for complete felony frameworks that guard athletes’ rights and make certain moral governance in the sports activities area.

 Gender discrimination 

Women are prone to experience stress, anxiety, and depression more than men. It is imperative to carry out gender analysis hence in order to determinechallenges that limit the female athletes such as lack of opportunity, cases of stereotype and prejudice in relation to coverage of sports and athletes, gender violence, and funding. By acknowledging these barriers, the policies and the programs that will be put in place will be efficient.

We need to highlight the promotion of females’ sports and the proper provision of opportunities for any practicing sportswoman. What one has to remember is concerning use of gender-based analysis to provide help for female athletes and advocacy for gender equality in sports.

Due to various forms of gender bias, female athletes in India sustain various vices such as having less Chances that female athletes have than their male counterpart. Frequently, women’s teams are provided less funding and other supporting tools resulting to lesser training and fewer competitions. Also they are confined to stereotyping and discriminate them in sports media which may reduce their popularity and achievement in the society.

The female athletes also undergo gender violence and harassment in the sporting arena and among fellow competitors and even in their pockets and purses, or in their marriage and other relationships. These barriers are compounded by the inequalities in the provision of funding for the female athletes and are discriminated compared to the male athletes. 

The problem of reducing women athletes is deep, stripping them of self-confidence, reducing chances of career advancement. Some of the common feminine athletic issues include; women athletes are not facilitated adequately as they require for them to train, disadvantage to others of their age group in areas such as development, physical and emotional health.

India has taken appropriate legal measures to stop gender discrimination in sports. Nonetheless, gender bias is still evident in the sporting sector despite these laws. The authorities can make the existing regulations more effective by ensuring that they are implemented strictly. A number of cases where these laws have been effectively implemented include All India Football Federation hiring a women’s head coach for their women’s team and Khelo India scheme being launched.

Cases of gender discrimination in athletics have involved much legal battling for equality. Landmark legislations, such as Title IX of the United States, have been used to oppose discriminatory practices by providing females and males equal opportunities in programs of education and athletics. Legal cases have focused on issues such as pay equity, funding discrepancies, facilities access, and other problems symptomatic of deep-seated biases that women and non-binary athletes suffer under. High-profile cases, such as the appeal by the U.S. Women’s National Soccer Team for equal pay, are only serving to keep issues at the forefront of the public eye and further highlighting how dire the role of the legal system is in moving the needle regarding gender equity in sports. Though progress has been made on these issues, much more work—both legally and otherwise—remains to be done in the quest to fight discrimination and attain athletic inclusivity.

Gender based bias is ingrained in the very fabric of society and culture, which is awfully true when it comes to India. 

A self – written comment by a female athlete-

“I comprehend high amount of discrimination exists there against females. Those days were very different from now; girls rarely wore shorts and played outside their houses. When I was selected for state games, my parents did not know that I used to wear my brother’s shorts to play due to the fact that they were uncommonly found on a girl like me. That indicates what a conservative world we are living in. They are not being kept away by any federation or big institution, but society itself denies its women from participating in sports. There is something peculiarly for a girl child, unknown if this is due to societal practices but she cannot play sports because there is some thought somewhere deep down that if she plays sports when she is young her hymen will break through sports and create problems in her married life”.

Policy Reforms

Gender discrimination in sports, therefore, calls for policy reforms that ensure fairness and equitability. Laws such as Title IX need strengthening through regular compliance audits and great awareness in the institutions and sporting organizations. Ideas about sex and gender are inextricably linked to sport because it is in the very nature of sporting activity to test our human differences by establishing conditions that separate athletes based on those differences.Sport structures competition, through the separation of men and women as a way of preserving that nature and is one of the last bastions of modern society in which sex segregation is permitted, mandated and regulated. The inclusion or exclusion of athletes may therefore be viewed as legitimate when in the pursuit of this aim, even when exclusion is incompatible with principles of human rights. It is viewed that men have considerable physiological advantages over women, and this raises the need for division. Even within the female category, whilst women have been celebrated for their strength, power and stamina, at the same time they were viewed with suspicion because these are traits that remain associated with masculinity and, in turn, an advantage in sport. As the binary division is being challenged by the expansion of gender identity, a unique problem presents itself—how to determine sex for sport and include individuals who do not meet the strict criteria to be eligible to compete in the binary female category, whilst at the same time protecting the rights of athletes and ensuring non-discrimination in sport. To guard the categories in sport, international governing bodies such as the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF), now World Athletics have had the liberty to apply eligibility criteria to those athletes who are perceived to challenge those categories , as a way of somehow controlling femininity. Such rules have largely been framed in terms of physiological advantage and underpinned by contested scientific understandings of sex and gender. It will be apparent that little consideration has been given to questions of human rights in the formation of those rules. Most commentators agree that the historic regulation of sex and gender was humiliating and discriminatory, but at that time, society also shared a binary view of sex and gender. The subliminal reasoning behind this policy was to address gender fraud, avoid scandals, both athletic and social, preserve fair competitive and performance advantage, and uphold the ‘natural’ male and female order of things. However, these policies that were set up did not have to be founded on true markers. The physical outward perusal by IAAF towards their female athletes started in the 1930s and evolved into the ‘peek and poke’ sex tests during the 1960s. With the introduction of new technology, a new form of sex testing, ‘The Barr body test’, was introduced at the 1968 Summer and Winter Olympic Games, which were based upon testing athletes for the presence of a Y chromosome, again reinforcing the idea that possession of a male Y chromosome produces superior athletic ability. This was an inconsistent, unreliable method as chromosomes affect remote performance and varied cell patterns could naturally exist in men and women. This mandatory chromosomal and genetic testing was abolished by the IAAF and the IOC in the year 2000 and replaced with a health-focused medical examination. They pointed out that chromosomal makeup needed to be taken into consideration as one did legal and psychological recognition of sex. The consequences of testing and dividing sports based on only some of the factors that determine sex led to the unreasonable exclusion of people whose sex and gender varied and could not be strictly categorized. Eventually the term ‘gender verification’ took the place of’sex testing’, and the process moved to a ‘suspicion ‘-based model in which testing operated on an individual basis as part of an eligibility regime. The regulatory framework of the IOC and IAAF medical commissions was then shifted to focus on levels of testosterone among athletes competing in the female category. The reasoning followed that all females should be hormonally similar because, in sports, testosterone has been considered as one of the major factors that affect performance. It is believed that the presence of high levels of testosterone gives an athlete a competitive edge over other competitors. This core belief, in some ways, has implicitly persisted in modern strategies of regulation and testing. There is a need to take stock of the current landscape regarding intersex and transgender policies and establish where gaps are infringing on athletes’ rights to gender. In its zeal to seek out hormonally similar women, the IAAF developed a Policy on Gender Verification in the year 2006. The eligibility of a gender-ambiguous athlete may have been protested by officials or rival athletes, which may have resulted in mandatory treatment. This policy was harmful to the integrity, dignity, and rights of an athlete, the degrading treatment of which is well documented in the case of Indian female athlete, Santhi Soundarajin. The significant shortfalls in this policy were further exposed by the treatment of South African middle distance runner Caster Semenya in 2009, who was required to undergo gender verification testing, was restricted from competing for six months and was instructed to undergo hormone treatment in the form of oral contraceptives to lower her testosterone levels. The overall approach to intersex policies seems to be on the lines of exclusionary functioning and the scientific basis of performance advantage with no regard for the legal stipulations of human rights. The challenges to the 2018 Regulations came through Semenya v IAAF and have engendered the growing global debate about gender and sport. The involvement of trans athletes in sports is discussed in detail elsewhere, but the findings of the Semenya case bear major implications for both intersex and trans-athlete sports policies. Both policies have been addressed in similar ways, often intertangled and lacking accurate distinction between the identities. In 2004, the IOC passed its first trans-athlete policy. The Stockholm Consensus on Sex Reassignment in Sport influenced policymaking in this field, detailing in its stipulations that to be eligible for participation post-puberty, an athlete shall have: completed surgical internal and external anatomical changes and legal recognition of their assigned sex, undergone hormonal therapy for a minimum of two years to decrease gender-related advantages. It was attacked based on several of its medical requirements, the lack of evidence to back them up, its transphobic connotations, and its generally exclusionary nature—all legally inconsistent. 

Conclusion 

To sum up, the sports journey and its legal aspect is a complex tapestry made up of victories, challenges as well as an emotional story about justice. It aims to draw attention to the problem of bias in society and calls for the improvement of policies, bringing fairness and gender equality into sports sphere. The future should be like that which reduces stereotypes enabling everyone participate in sports without any partiality based on gender, cultural background or norms of the society. I also want to add something important for society and women who read this article. You have to know your rights and obligations, You can use laws but then again you have to note down whatever bad happened to you you yourself have to fight for the same and achieve success.

References 

1. Sports law (2023) S.S. Rana & Co. Available at:https://ssrana.in/corporate-laws/gaming-and-sports-laws-india/sports-law-faq/#:~:text=Sports%20law%20is%20an%20area,%2C%20teams%2C%20managers%20and%20associates (Accessed: 15 July 2024). 
2. Ayush Verma, Everything you need to know about sports law in India – iPleaders,  (Jan. 10, 2021), https://blog.ipleaders.in/everything-need-know-sports-law-india/.( Accessed-15 July,2024)
3. The Legal And Ethical Implications Of Gender discrimination And Sexual Harassment In Sports, With Focus On India’s Sports Industry – IPLF, (Dec. 22, 2023), https://www.ipandlegalfilings.com/the-legal-and-ethical-implications-of-gender-discrimination-and-sexual-harassment-in-sports-with-focus-on-indias-sports-industry/( Accessed- 15 July,2024)
4. (Jan 26, 2024), https://jlrjs.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/15.-HIMANSHI-TIKAWAT.pdf.( Accessed – 15 July,2024)