Part 3 GLOBAL ISSUES: HARASSMENT AND ABUSE RESEARCH

Reflections
An analysis of the Dutch policy to prevent sexual abuse in sports and
of the research this policy is based on is only meaningful when viewed in the
context of the assumption that sexual abuse in sports is a combination of
three major risk factors: coach, sports situation and athlete. Within that sportspecific
context it is clear that most of the research and the prevention policy
focus on the risk sports situation.
To understand the nature of this imbalance, we must first consider the
strong influence of the paradigms that are the conceptual basis of the
research: Wolf’s “Cycle of Offending”, originally derived from paedophile
behaviour, in combination with Finkelhor’s “Four Preconditions of Sexual
Abuse”. 12 Wolf’s cycle of offending suffers a conceptual restriction,
specifically portraying the offender’s sexual behaviour as (biologically)
compulsive, leaving no room for sociocultural interpretations. To overcome
this, Brackenridge proposed the “Predator Cycle” as an alternative. 13 This
predator cycle not only differs from Wolf’s cycle with respect to possible
sociocultural explanations of the perpetrator’s behaviour, but also in the way
the perpetrator is portrayed: confident, successful, with good social skills and
power-driven. Wolf described the perpetrator as withdrawn, unassertive and
with low self-esteem. The available NOC*NSF data on sexual abusers in
sports coincides in many aspects with the perpetrator as a predator. Only a
few exceptions resemble Wolf’s concept of the paedophile. This shift in
paradigms makes it possible to include sociocultural explanations of sexual
aggression in sports, but will not fully establish at its own a shift in focus from
the risk sports situation to the two under-exposed major risks factors.
To understand why, we have to consider a second reason for the
imbalance mentioned above, namely the fact that both sociocultural and
sociobiological explanations are macro-level models. This makes them very
useful for the development of macro policy connected with the risk sports
situation. But to develop a policy to potentially prevent the two other major risk
factors, coach and athlete, we need to add a micro-level oriented theory.
Looking at the risk factor coach, such a theory should be able to
specify the general conditions outlined by sociocultural and sociobiological
theories, by addressing variables that differentiate between aggressors and
36