The Social Construction of ‘Mental Toughness’ – a Fascistoid Ideology?

Abstract

This article considers the social construction of mental toughness in line with prevailing social attitudes towards success and dominance in elite sport. Critical attention is drawn to the research literature which has sought to conceptualise mental toughness and the idealistic rhetoric and metaphor with which it has done so. The concept of mental toughness currently reflects an elitist ideal, constructed along the lines of the romantic narrative of the ‘Hollywood hero’ athlete. In contrast, the mental and moral virtues which should form the basis of mental toughness are often neglected when an athlete ‘fails’. Currently, mental toughness exists as a characteristic used to describe successful athletes and is only applied in hindsight. Finally, we recommend that the morally problematic association of mental toughness (within the media, society, and the research community) with ultimate success needs to be removed in order to rescue the concept from the elitist discourses which currently surround and suffocate it.

Keywords:

• mental toughness
• elitism
• idealism
• sport psychology

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge the helpful comments of Brett Smith and two anonymous reviewers on an earlier version of this manuscript.

Notes

1. ‘Fascistoid’ refers to Torbjörn Tännsjö’s neologism concerning something tending to or resembling fascism. See Tännsjö (2000).

2. These attributes and characteristics encompass a very vast array of traits and concepts and it is beyond the scope of this paper to list them all or address them all fully. Nevertheless, throughout the paper we intend to give the reader a flavour of the sort of characteristics that have come to shape the concept of ‘mental toughness’.

3. The elitist values which underpin the current conceptualisation of mental toughness also clearly have their roots in dominant masculine sporting values of strength, power, and superiority over others, thereby helping to forge mental toughness into a gendered social construction.

4. Reid (2010) reminds us of the way in which heroic athletic qualities were celebrated as god-like traits in the heroes of ancient Greek mythology. In modern times, athletes are often highly regarded for their heroic qualities, which seem to be reflected in the way mental toughness is referred to as ‘unshakeable’, ‘insatiable’, and ‘unbelievable’. Reid further questioned whether it is acceptable for athletes to be regarded as heroes in this manner; a question which applies equally to athletes who are celebrated as heroes for their ‘heroic’ mental toughness.

5. Many of the qualities and values promoted by the construct of mental toughness represent very positive human characteristics which can enrich the lives of those who hold them. However, problems exist when such characteristics are linked with elitism and absolute success, as appears to be the case with mental toughness. Such problems are the focus of later sections of this essay.

6. Sparkes (2004) demonstrated how Armstrong’s story parallels the classical monomyth – the story of the brave hero who undertakes a noble quest – a story particularly valorised by Western culture, and which provides the template for the ‘Hollywood hero’ narrative being critiqued here as a primary component of mental toughness.

7. Izod (2002) contends that one of the reasons for our adulation of sporting heroes and their stories is that we seek to gain something personally from our identification with their image and their glory. ‘A hero’s triumphs and failures are our own’ (Izod 2002, 371). Similarly, it is because of our intense fascination with winners that the heroic stories of champion athletes are so well publicised (Messner 1992).

8. Crust (2008) also takes issue with the way in which mental toughness is overtly associated with success in current definitions. Owing to the fact that all athletes possess differing levels of skills and abilities, Crust suggests that conceiving mental toughness in absolute, rather than relative terms may be a mistake.

9. This example also relates well to another point which Tännsjö (2000) makes about nationalism (although this theme will not be developed further in this essay). Specifically, Tännsjö argued that elitism directed towards national sports teams reflects a potentially dangerous form of nationalism (particularly at times when political nationalism is strong), which is also associated with a ‘fascistoid’ ideology.

10. Messner (1992) makes a similar point in his book ‘Power at Play’, suggesting that it is possible for athletes to develop their own definitions of success whereby they may celebrate their greatest achievements, yet are often prevented from fully doing so by the dominant and prevailing social attitude towards success in sports.

11. An analysis of the metaphor of SPORT AS WAR has recently been considered in more detail by Shields and Bredemeier (2011).

12. Once again, Messner (1992) takes issue with this attitude toward success and failure. He argues that the Lombardian ethic creates a structured system of failure that is evident at all levels of sports competition, from elite level, right through to organised children’s sport.

13. Our thanks to an anonymous reviewer to alerting us to this possibility.

14. Indeed, when it comes to elite level sport, sport psychology seems to have all but forgotten its lessons surrounding the adaptive properties of a ‘mastery oriented motivational climate’, in which athletes are praised for effort and determination, and for the mastery of various sporting skills - rather than for objective success and superiority (Harwood, Spray, and Keegan 2008). However, rather than suggest that sport psychology return to recommendations often directed toward grass roots sport, we argue that the core of mental toughness should emphasise ‘mental excellences’ that resonate with Aristotle’s call to strive for the achievement of one’s highest potential.

15. As illustrated by the Ancient Greek concepts of arête, sophrosyne and askesis (Dombrowski 2009).