Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMiddleton, Tim
dc.date.accessioned2013-10-28T11:13:00Z
dc.date.available2013-10-28T11:13:00Z
dc.date.issued2013
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10369/4855
dc.description.abstractThis paper has sought to justify, on ethical terms, that sex segregation ought not be imposed upon functionally classified disability sports. The findings from this paper fall into three categories: meaningful competition, sameness-difference and is-ought. When proposing the instigation of desegregated sport in functional classification through the concept of meaningful competition it was found that although opportunities to demonstrate excellence could conceivably be improved, fair play tenets were breeched due to the masculinist nature of sport. The latter conclusion was then questioned through the sameness-difference chapter where humanistic and gynocentric/difference philosophies were analysed in order to establish whether masculinity dictates sporting success, and if so why that then is significant. Although debatable, it was concluded that separate male and female competition narrows the concepts of femininity and disability and perpetuates difference and oppression. In the final chapter the significance of all that had been discussed in the paper was analysed in terms of Hume’s fact-value distinction. Through acceptance of the logic of both the analytic bridge principle and Searle’s promissory obligation it was concluded that the evaluative statement ‘desegregated sport ought to be in place under functional classification’ was found to be linked to fact and justified in terms of that link.en_US
dc.formatThesisen
dc.languageEnglishen
dc.publisherCardiff Metropolitan Universityen_US
dc.titleAGAINST SEX SEGREGATION UNDER FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following collection(s)

Show simple item record