The need for a violence prevention programme in ice hockey: a case study on how hegemonic masculinity supports and challenges violent behaviour in Swedish ice hockey

ABSTRACT

Research question: Research has shown that male team sports can nurture aggressive and sexist attitudes and behaviour. Against a background of identified sports and ice hockey masculinities and how they relate to violence norms, the aim of this article is to identify masculinity ideals in need of interventions.

Research method: As part of a larger project on masculinity ideals and violence norms in Swedish ice hockey, this case study is based on a thematic analysis of interviews with five Swedish ice hockey coaches. Theoretically, the analysis is inspired by work on hegemonic masculinity and violence prevention.

Results and Findings: The findings derived from the interviews are discussed under three thematic headings: ‘The dual functions of sexism and group dynamics’, ‘Aggression and violence as problematic and progressive’ and ‘The stabilising and transformative role of a competitive environment’. In these, core values of the construction of hegemonic masculinity are identified and discussed.

Implications: The article contributes knowledge about risk factors in team sports and how attitudes and behaviour in a team or club can be both progressive and destructive at the same time. Based on the study's findings, work on violence prevention and the results of previous research, three preventive actions are suggested: 1. To erase sexist and derogative attitudes and actions so that they do not escalate, 2. Zero tolerance of alcohol consumption and drugs and 3. Change the rules in order to eliminate hard and reckless play.

KEYWORDS:

• Ice hockey
• aggression
• violence
• prevention
• masculinity

Introduction

Sport is an important site for teaching boys and men some of the key values associated with dominant masculinity, such as extreme competitiveness, aggression and dominance, and violence is normalised, naturalised and rewarded particularly in men’s contact sports. (Flood, 2019, p. 239)

Over the course of a couple of days in November and December 2019, three coaches in the National Hockey League (NHL) were dismissed due to ‘unprofessional behaviour’ (e.g. Beaton, 2019; Campbell, 2019; Higgins, 2019). Researchers have long highlighted how male team sporting cultures can construct an arena in which boys and men learn how to or risk becoming aggressive, homophobic, sexist and/or misogynous (Katz, 1995; Luisi et al., 2016; Messner, 1992; Messner & Sabo, 1994). Comprehensive research has highlighted the imprints of sexism and homophobia in North American hockey cultures (Allain, 2008, 2011, 2014; Pappas et al., 2004). Being a physical contact sport performed on ice, with a long tradition of producing ‘hyper-masculinity’, this may not come as a surprise (e.g. Lorenz, 2015). Until now, few changes seem to have been implemented. However, in an effort to prevent future problems, NHL commissioner Gary Bettman described the current situation as a window of opportunity and that the league must be a driving force in changing the culture. Interestingly, an education programme will now be introduced, which Bettman explained as follows:

… in order to expedite a change in culture and make clear the expectations we have for the conduct of coaches and other personnel, we will formulate a mandatory annual program on counseling, consciousness-raising, education and training on diversity and inclusion. (Beaton, 2019)

Changing a sports culture does not happen overnight and the culture that Bettman refers to is not just an NHL issue. Media reports in Sweden have also highlighted the violent culture of elite-level male ice hockey, which can include verbal misogyny, homophobia, physical violence and sexual abuse (e.g. Julin, 2017; Olofsson, 2017; Tolén, 2017, 2018). Although it is difficult to show a causal relationship, research has shown that some male team sporting cultures, such as those within ice hockey, make players violent both inside and outside the sporting arena (Pappas, 2012; Pappas et al., 2004). Of course, not all male ice hockey players and coaches are violent inside or outside the ice hockey rinks, although some of the attitudes that are fuelled in these environments can be considered problematic in that they create social norms that reproduce inequalities and beliefs about men’s superiority in general (Flood & Dyson, 2007).

In contrast to these problems, sport encompasses several positive attributes and promotes physical and psychological excellence, health and fair play. Such tenets, as well as the entertaining dimension of sports, are often utilised by commercial and political institutions to promote the benefits of sport within society. For example, watching sports events on TV or engaging in voluntary club events can be important and meaningful actions in people’s lives. Despite these positive dimensions, sport also has its ‘dark sides’ (cf. Pappas, 2012; Petroczi, 2009). As part of a more extensive project on Swedish ice hockey covering the changes in masculinity ideals and violence norms from 1965 until today, the aim of this article is to identify masculinity ideals in need of interventions. In other words, what kind of behaviour and attitudes can be regarded as problematic and what kind of interventions could help to prevent them? The purpose is to initiate a discussion about how problematic and sometimes contradictory masculinity ideals can become risk factors and identify how a violence prevention programme in Swedish ice hockey may be beneficial. The results are based on interviews with five experienced male ice hockey coaches in Sweden. Following a review of previous research the theoretical framework is presented. After this, the method and data are described and followed by the study’s findings. The article closes with three suggestions for preventative actions needed followed by a conclusion.

Previous research on team sports, hegemonic masculinity and violence

Many sports display characteristics that are traditionally associated with hegemonic masculinity, such as loyalty to team members (homosociality), attempts to dominate opponents, a willingness to obey the coach and a willingness to take risks (Allain, 2008; Connell, 2005; MacDonald, 2014, 2018; Messner & Sabo, 1994). The concept of ‘hegemonic masculinity’, which to a large extent originates from the works of Connell (1983, 2005) interprets sport as a societal institution that ultimately legitimises and fosters participants in norms and ideals that support a patriarchal society (Connell, 2005; Messner, 1992, 2013).

This interpretation of men and masculinities has also influenced scholars studying ice hockey (Allain, 2008, 2014; MacDonald, 2014, 2018). For instance, Vaz (1982) has studied institutions’ and coaches’ support of male ice hockey players’ expressions of aggressiveness, toughness, courage and other values embodying a combative and violent ideology. By having different gender rules, it can be argued that ice hockey may nurture the idea that male bodies are more suited to body checking and other hard physical contact than female bodies (Dicarlo, 2016; Gilenstam et al., 2008; Weaving & Roberts, 2012). In this way, ice hockey and other sports are embedded in the wider societal system in which the economy and the media can help to support men’s hegemony and patriarchal norms (cf. Hearn, 2015).

It is sometimes stated that the use of sport as a social tool can promote cohesion and solidarity, raise awareness about certain social issues, teach certain skills, emphasise the necessity of teamwork and develop a sense of belonging. Despite the ‘positive’ sides, sport also has ‘negative’ or challenging outcomes, such as doping, discrimination, exclusion, corruption to name a few (Schwery & Cade, 2009). Studies in the US context indicate that male college athletes are over-represented in cases of aggressive and violent sexual behaviour on college campuses (Berkowitz, 1992; Boeringer, 1996; Crosset et al., 1995; Frintner & Rubinson, 1993; Messner, 1992). Messner (2002) writes that this research ‘points to the conclusion that the athletes most likely to engage in sexual and other violent assaults off the field are those participating in the sports that I [Messner] define as being at the institutional center of sport’ (p. 28). Such a conclusion challenges the developing and value promoting aspects of sport participation. A similar conclusion is drawn by Schwery and Cade (2009), who state that ‘ … participation in sport cannot be expected to have major impact on reducing anti-social behaviour and violence. However, an environment transmitting non-violent values is vital for reaching a positive outcome’ (p. 475).

Regarding ice hockey, Weinstein et al. (1995) point out that male coaches and role models are important contributors to the legitimisation of violence. Pappas et al. (2004) interviewed former North American ice hockey players and found that they all had stories to tell about their own and other athletes’ involvement in violence and aggression in hockey, both on and off the ice. The informants described experiences with and observations of team mates’ violence against each other, opponents, bystanders and women. Their narratives also showed a strong connection between violent and aggressive behaviour off the ice with the consumption of alcohol (Pappas et al., 2004, p. 299).

Pappas et al. (2004) also show that some coaches encourage players to demonstrate toughness and fighting skills. Teammates and spectators often promote such ideals by demoting ‘softness’ and ‘sensitivity’ (Carlson, 2008). This inclination can be linked to a competitive and win-at-all-costs logic that is fundamental for the (re)production of hegemonic masculinity (English, 2017; Flood & Dyson, 2007; Pappas et al., 2004; Weinstein et al., 1995). Pappas et al. (2004) further contend that the ice hockey culture reinforces the objectification of women, ‘because of the focus on traditional male behaviours conducive to sports success and the large amount of time men spend exclusively with other males’ (p. 307). In other words, many male ice hockey players seem to bond and socialise through misogyny; a socialisation that simultaneously emphasises stereotypical or archetype manliness. For example, one informant in Pappas et al.’s (2004) study said: ‘Things like that machismo group mentality, that locker room mentality, comes out in off-ice behaviour … treating women really bad … like one-nighters or short-term girlfriends or someone they didn’t care very much, just as objects or sex partners’ (p. 306).

In Swedish and other contexts, researchers have confirmed the content of misogyny and sexism in male team sports (e.g. Alsarve & Angelin, 2019; Andreasson, 2006; Fundberg, 2003; Katz, 1995; Luisi et al., 2016; Messner, 1992; Messner & Sabo, 1994). With its focus on how to engage men and boys in violence prevention, Flood’s (2019) work helps us to understand such content as a fundamental and initial step in eradicating men’s violence against women and other men. Although there are strong arguments for male dominated team sports’ sexism, the objectification of women and femininity and the social problems associated with this, Crosset (1999) clarifies the risk of simplification by only attributing such attitudes to participation in ice hockey or a team sport and contends that alcohol consumption, sport diversities, socialisation(s) in a sport, society at large and other background factors also need to be taken into account. Crosset (1999) concludes that:

… efforts to challenge hegemonic masculinity must call on the very qualities hegemonic masculinity exalts – toughness, endurance, determination and the like and if implemented correctly intervention strategies to reduce male athletes’ violence against women will embrace the same qualities necessary to become an excellent athlete. (p. 255)

This encapsulates an intricate dilemma of team body contact sports, in that the very same qualities that might make someone a successful ice hockey player could also encourage misogynist and violent behaviour. Messner (2002) puts it more forthrightly and argues that we should not be surprised when we read about athletes committing violence or being sentenced to prison for sexual abuse or even rape, because ‘[f]ar from being an aberration perpetrated by some marginal deviants, male athletes’ off-the-field violence is generated from the normal, everyday dynamics at the centre of male athletic culture’ (p. 28). Messner (2002) continues and states that ‘a number of studies of men’s college athletics in recent years have pointed to statistically significant relationships between athletic participation and sexual aggression’ (p. 28). For instance, works by Curry (1991, 1998, 2000) have described how some male teams demonstrate support for violence against women and a sexist, aggressive and negative attitude towards women and femininity. Similar results have also been found in the Swedish context (Alsarve & Angelin, 2019; Andreasson, 2006; Fundberg, 2003). Being a central part of a patriarchal society, it should come as no surprise that as well as training athletes to be healthy and strong, some sports also train and unintentionally foster their participants in traditionally masculine, anti-feminist attitudes that could include the use of violence (in a broad sense) towards other men and towards women (Crosset et al., 1995; Flood & Dyson, 2007).

But as not all ice hockey players are or become violent, it seems somewhat audacious to conclude that participation in ice hockey or other male dominated team sports is the same as being socialised into a culture of misogyny and aggression, even though some players do become violent outside the ice rink. Despite some research intimations, there is little evidence of a causal relationship between participation in sport and violent behaviour (Katz, 1995; Lance, 2005; Messner & Sabo, 1994; Sacks et al., 2003; Smith, 1979; Weinstein et al., 1995). Drawing on the potential of sport, Matthews and Channon (2017) criticise definitions of sports violence for not putting sufficient focus on such actions in relation to the sport’s own logic. They argue that scholars need to be more sensitive to people who are engaged in sport and to how practitioners make sense of and understand ‘violence’. Emphasis is thus put on the subjective experiences of ‘violence’ and it is argued that without this close-up interrogation, researchers risk unfairly stigmatising certain sports and athletes.

The problem thus seems to lie in identifying the problem, especially as the masculinity ideals regarded as being most in need of interventions are somewhat contradictory. The phenomenon of what in British English is known as initiation ceremonies and in US English as hazing – rituals, challenges and other activities involving harassment, abuse or humiliation to initiate people into groups, clubs or teams – illustrates this ‘dilemma’, as do the challenges of intervention or violence prevention in a sport context. Even though research has shown that initiation rituals or hazing can weaken a team’s cohesion, they are nevertheless quite common in sport (Crow & Macintosh, 2009), as is the over consumption of alcohol. In their study, Crow and Macintosh (2009) identify a grey zone of violence, where student-athletes and coaches/administrators have difficulty agreeing on a common definition of the problem of ‘hazing’, because what is perceived as harmless to some could be perceived as physically threatening or emotionally damaging to others. It has also been found that male athletes appear to be more involved in physical initiation rituals, while female athletes seem to be more engaged in emotional acts (Crow & Macintosh, 2009).

‘Hazing’ is not developed in a vacuum, but is rather part of a sporting tradition and is part of a ‘cycle of repeat offensive acts’ (Crow & Macintosh, 2009, p. 441) that permit victims of the practice to do the same to others. The strengths of these destructive activities can be explained by a fear of exclusion and the ‘spiral of silence’ in a group dynamic (Noelle-Neumann, 1974; Steen-Johnsen & Enjolras, 2016). These social motives may help to explain a group’s tendency towards conformity, shared norms and attitudes that could create a sense of solidarity, identity and belonging. This in itself makes intervention and violence prevention challenging, especially if ‘hazing’ is perceived as ‘fun’ or ‘a tonic’. In other words, the creation of a group’s solidarity could be based on destructive actions. The spiral of silence is strengthened if individuals feel unable to or do not dare to express unpopular opinions, as such expressions could lead to isolation or exclusion from the group. Due to the power of tradition and its counter-productive outcomes, it is suggested that legal repercussions and sanctions, in combination with workshops and guest speaker lectures, would be necessary in order to put an end to such ritualistic acts in college sport (Crow & Macintosh, 2009).

To summarise this literature review, it could be argued that a sports culture is so full of nuances and contradictions that it is difficult to draw generalising conclusions. As an illustration it could, on the one hand, be presumed that sport-related violence has a masculinising dimension and effect that male athletes find easy to portray (Messner, 1992). Gendered rules support this and also help to define violence and aggression in ice hockey as nurturing a hegemonic masculinity (Dicarlo, 2016; Gilenstam et al., 2008; Weaving & Roberts, 2012). On the other hand, the ‘paradox’ between femininity and violence/aggression makes it possible for women/girls to challenge such hegemonic perceptions of femininity and, thereby, also challenge violent expressions as a masculine monopoly (cf. Dicarlo, 2016).

With this previous research in mind, the next section presents a theoretical framework that helps us to understand the problem of violence among male athletes in ice hockey and the need for preventative interventions.

Theoretical framework: sport participation and violence prevention

Previous research indicates a link between participation in sport, the construction of hegemonic masculinity and the promotion of violent and aggressive behaviour. The question is, how can this be interpreted from a more theoretical perspective, with a specific focus on the eventual need for preventative interventions?

Initially, it seems sufficient to interpret the notion of ‘violence’ from a broad departure point that includes physical, psychological, verbal and other non-physical aspects (cf. Messner, 1992, 2002; Messner, 2013). For example, ‘hazing’ can be physical, verbal and have psychological dimensions. This theoretical mark is central, since violence is often primarily perceived as a physical phenomenon (Rosenberg & Stevens, 2013).

However, broadening the concept of violence could be risky, in that the kinds of violence prevention interventions and methods that are suggested would depend on how violence was defined. ‘Narrow’ definitions could, for example, trivialise women’s experiences of vulnerability, threats or behaviour, the effects of which are identical to physical violence. Obviously, narrow definitions would lead to fewer prosecutions. However, from a violence prevention perspective, it is important to highlight that the psychological and emotional dimensions of violence can sometimes be more harmful than physical violence (Flood, 2019, p. 20). Conversely, the definition of violence should not be too broad and obscure behaviour that causes violence. According to Flood (2019), a successful preventative intervention is characterised by a feminist understanding of violence, which places violence in a gendered, power-relational context. Other promising practice factors that provide violent men and boys with alternative options for action include recurrent and long-term treatment programmes.

At a more structural level, Flood (2019) maintains that research shows a co-variance between the causes of men’s violence against women and men’s violence against children. More specifically, such factors consist of violence-supportive social norms, weak legal sanctions, male dominance and high levels of social violence (Flood, 2019). Previous research findings on the norms, attitudes, rules and normalised perceptions of violence in sport indicate that the risk factors that contribute to men’s violence against women and children shouldtherefore be key parts of any violence prevention programme in sport. As the risk factors are also to some extent key ingredients in the formation of hegemonic masculinity, it could be argued that the promotion of a more progressive masculinity would change this problematic culture (cf. Crosset, 1999, p. 255). According to Flood (2019) derogative attitudes need to be addressed, because a masculinity that is based on a disdain for, e.g. attributes associated with femininity amplifies gender inequality and could stimulate men’s violence against women (Flood, 2019).

Flood (2019) argues that by adopting patriarchal and hostile gender norms and sexist attitudes, men are more likely to use violence against women. Conversely, men who do not nurture such attitudes are less likely to use violence against women. Flood’s work thus underlines the importance of changing degrading attitudes and language at an early stage before they escalate. Flood’s broad understanding of violence puts the often violating attitudes that are prevalent in male ice hockey teams, and are interpreted as patriarchal and hostile gender norms, in a problematic light (Allain, 2008, 2014; Luisi et al., 2016; MacDonald, 2018; Pappas, 2012). For some players, a group’s heterosexism, diminishing jokes or offensive attitudes could lead to attitudes and behaviour that result in illegal actions, such as assaults (Fields et al., 2007; Flood, 2019; Flood & Pease, 2009).

By changing coaches’ and players’ demeaning attitudes, a team or a club could play a developing and preventative role in society (cf. Crow & Macintosh, 2009). An effective violence prevention model would address several levels (micro, meso and macro) and include language and behaviour interventions with an adapted, intensive and relevant educational content. Ideally, such programmes would employ a critical perspective on men and masculinities based on a feminist analysis of societal relations (Flood, 2019; Flood & Dyson, 2007).

Data and methodology

The data included in this article derives from interviews with experienced ice hockey coaches who were themselves active hockey players in the past. A purposive sampling strategy (Bryman, 2016, p. 408) was used and initial contact made with five potential participants with the overall aim of reaching variation in terms of age and levels of coaching. One coach had recently retired, another was active as children’s and youth coach, one worked at national level and the two remaining coaches were professionals at the elite level. Emails were sent and one of the informants (David – pseudonyms have been applied) responded positively immediately. After an initial interview with David, he recommended several other coaches to be interviewed, which resulted in a ‘snowball sampling strategy’ (Bryman, 2016, p. 415). The author emailed a reminder to the remaining four coaches and also contacted two additional coaches recommended by David. This resulted in four coaches agreeing to be interviewed (one of the professional coaches declined participation and one of David’s recommendations did the same). All the interviews were conducted during the off-season and took place in a changing room (Erik), office environment (Adam and David) or by telephone (Bertil and Ceasar).

This study’s approach has both advantages and disadvantages and the results should be interpreted as indicators of the hockey environment’s climate. Concerning eventual bias amongst the interviewees, it should be noted that the informants agreed to be interviewed about group dynamics, aggression and ice hockey as an eventual risk environment, which implied that they were more or less open to (self-)critically discussing and reflecting on their own experiences and leadership regarding these problematic issues in ice hockey. However, as not all ice hockey coaches and former players are open to deliberately participating in such discussions (two of the approached coaches denied participation in this case), and as hegemonic masculinity structures ice hockey, a general lack of recognition of sexism amongst the informants can be assumed, given that they had all been involved in ice hockey for a very long time (cf. Flood, 2019). The informants’ narratives are thus not autonomous creations. According to Edley (2001), this results in an ‘internal’ negotiation that could in turn result in an ideological dilemma between ‘intellectual’ ideologies that are narrated to the interviewer and ‘lived’ ideologies that are performed in the interviewer’s absence. For instance, in this study the informants were reluctant to reflect on their own involvement in violence on and off the ice and did not want to spend much time talking about it.

Regarding the ethical agreements, each interview was introduced with a declaration that the informants’ narratives would be treated anonymously and that at any time the informant had the right to interrupt or stop the interview without explanation. The interview guide was semi-structurally designed to enable follow-up questions and a flowing conversation (cf. Kvale, 2007). In order to encourage the informants to start talking and remembering, the interview began with questions that were directed at the informants’ experiences and general impressions of Swedish hockey from a historical perspective. The next part of the interview focused on coach-related issues regarding group dynamics and language. Subsequently, questions were asked about attitudes and whether the informants had experienced or witnessed problems in terms of violence or abusive language. As the informants were both coaches and former players, it was natural for them to relate to events they had experienced as players in the past. The interviews ended with an open question about whether the informant wanted to add anything that he felt had not been covered during the interview. The interview guide thus covered the positive and problematic aspects of the ice hockey culture. Each interview lasted approximately 1 h. All the interviews were transcribed verbatim and the informants received transcriptions of their interviews and were given an opportunity to make changes or additions to their statements.

Table 1 shows a summary of the informants. It should be added that since the 1990s all coaches in Sweden have to be qualified to coach specific levels of the game. This means that if, e.g. they intend to coach children they have to complete a course that qualifies them as a children’s hockey coach. Overall, the informants had experiences of playing ice hockey at amateur and professional levels in Sweden and abroad. They also had diverse experiences of coaching children, youths and seniors at local, national and international levels.

Table 1. A summary of the informants.

Name (fictitious)	Decade born	Levels as player	Levels as coach
Adam	1940s	Amateur level, mainly in second highest division in Sweden.	From youth to highest (professional) level in Sweden.
Bertil	1970s	Professional level in Sweden, North America and other places.	Mainly youth level, with two years at professional level.
Ceasar	1970s	Elite youth level, second to fourth highest division, mainly as an amateur in Sweden.	Children and youth coach, a few years in the second highest division in an amateur team.
David	1950s	In highest and second highest divisions in Sweden.	In principle at all levels in children’s and youth hockey, from club to youth national team level in Sweden.
Erik	1960s	Mainly as professional in Sweden and abroad.	Coach at highest level in Sweden and other parts of Europe.

The analytical process can be summarised in three steps. Firstly, with inspiration from Graneheim and Lundman (2004), a thematic analysis was carried out in which different ‘meaning units’ were transformed into ‘condensed meaning units’ and finally collected as ‘codes’. For example, if the informant said, ‘You must never back out of a fight if someone challenges you’ (= meaning unit), this was ‘shortened’ to (the ‘condensed meaning unit’) ‘Never back out of a fight’ and interpreted as an ideal (or ‘code’): ‘Stand up for the team, don’t show weakness’. Secondly, the codes or ideals were then placed within the theoretical frame and interpreted in terms of an eventual hegemonic masculinity and/or violence-supportive ideal. The results of this second step are presented in the findings. Lastly, as Flood’s (2019) work on violence prevention was used, the implications section thus contains three preventative actions.

Findings

Based on the interviews, this section presents the informants’ views of the ice hockey culture. After the application of the theoretical framework, the data was grouped into three themes: ‘The dual functions of sexism and group dynamics’, ‘Aggression and violence as problematic and progressive’ and ‘The stabilising and transformative role of a competitive environment’. These themes are presented below.

The dual functions of sexism and group dynamics

A key ingredient in hegemonic masculinity is the clear boundary with women/femininity, which is often expressed by objectifying sexism and in diminishing jokes (Connell, 2005). Research also shows that in general men are less likely to notice and recognise (hetero)sexism and the discrimination of women/femininity than women (Drury & Kaiser, 2014). In other words, in men’s social interactions there is a tendency for sexism and homophobia to become normalised (e.g. Allain, 2014; Andreasson, 2006; Fundberg, 2003; MacDonald, 2018). This could, of course, also apply to women.

Reflecting on the behaviour and attitudes that could be considered as problematic, Adam said that he had not noticed or reflected very much on the players’ views of women or any discriminating language until the end of his fifty year coaching career. Here, not noticing or reflecting could be interpreted as a way of normalising sexism. Ceasar was much more open about his unawareness of gender in the past and described his experiences of how sexism was normalised by coaches and peers in the teams he played for in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Ceasar gave two examples of this. When he was 13–14 years of age, he and his teammates used to gather in a circle on the ice in front of the goalkeeper before each match and shout ‘Pussy, pace – hand grenades!’ to each other. ‘It was like – no parent or coach reacted … and if you did that today it would be a scandal!’ (Interview with Ceasar). He continued by saying that in the past there was also a different way of looking at and talking about women in general:

… regarding the language ‘male, female’, it’s a thing of the past, you judged a girl and you never hear that now. You could say something like ‘I’ll dance with her on Friday because she’s got such damn nice tits!’ You’d never say anything like that today! (Interview with Ceasar)

Ceasar then gave a second example of the coaches of a junior team he played with who drank alcohol and watched pornographic films in the bus when returning from away matches. He reflected that such behaviour affected the players’ values, their talk about and views of women and their attitudes towards alcohol. But the players did not explicitly protest and were, Ceasar reflected, probably not aware of the problematical nature of this behaviour. It was not until Ceasar joined the senior team, where two other coaches created a completely different environment, that he ‘discovered’ and became aware of the problem with the language and behaviour of the junior coaches and junior team. According to Ceasar, the coaches of the senior team created an amazingly positive environment for him as a young player, where the consumption of alcohol and pornography was definitely not encouraged.

Another study in this same project indicates that sexism, alcohol consumption, homophobia and devaluating attitudes towards weakness et cetera is still prevalent in (some) Swedish hockey environments (Alsarve & Angelin, 2019). However, the coaches in this study claimed that the language in the changing room had changed for the better over the past 20–30 years. Adam, who was the most experienced of the informants, said that ‘Before, there was a lot of ‘chewing’, chatting, backbiting, sarcasm and taunting’, but that this had changed for the better over the years (interview with Adam).

Regarding the changes, David explained that one thing that had helped to change and erase sexism from the ice hockey culture was that the ‘old type’ of coach, whose philosophy of ‘my way or the highway’ constructed a very restraining hierarchy, had almost disappeared. According to David, this was because those coaches were rarely successful and therefore no longer in demand, and also that the interventions in the coaching programmes hosted by the Swedish Ice Hockey Association had contributed to the creation of good behaviour and good citizens, rather than exclusively good ice hockey players. It is noteworthy that David placed the problematic behaviour in the past and connected it to certain coaching styles, which was perhaps a sign of glorifying contemporary ice hockey.

In relation to placing the problem in the past and thus ‘outside’ the contemporary environment, it is worth mentioning that several informants also pointed to the media as having an effect on the norms of aggression and violence in ice hockey – a theme that is examined in the next section.

Aggression and violence as problematic and progressive

Verbally or physically dominating opponents and displaying aggressive behaviour may ultimately foster participants in patriarchal norms (Connell, 2005). Some research results point to the fact that some sports not only make practitioners more violent inside the arena, but also outside it (cf. Pappas, 2012; Pappas et al., 2004). However, Matthews and Channon (2017) argue for a ‘close’ meaning-making of violence in sport. That is, researchers risk stigmatising sports violence if it is not interpreted in its sporting and situational logic.

During the interviews, Adam and Ceasar provided examples of players with a tough playing style on the ice and who, after their careers, had experienced problems with alcohol. The same players had often been aggressive at team parties. Adam, Ceasar and David said that the end of season team parties were always ‘wet’ and that players often drank too much. Erik and Bertil said that they had heard of or seen TV documentaries about ‘goons’ who had been drinking too much during or after their careers and then got into trouble outside the rink, but could not remember any former teammates having such problems. Only Adam and Ceasar confirmed that for some players the ice hockey culture could become a risk zone for developing addictions to alcohol and violent and aggressive behaviour off the ice.

It is important to add that contrary to this reasoning, Bertil, David and Erik talked about their experiences of the ‘hardest’ players also being very kind off the ice, that ice hockey had the potential to rescue boys and young men from a more crime-related future and that, in some cases, the sport could function as a rescue service for them and thus as an area for social development (cf. Schwery & Cade, 2009). The ‘violent’ character of the sport can thus be said to have two sides to it: (a) a rescue potential and (b) a risk potential.

In contrast to the research results that point to the problematic aspects of ice hockey violence, Bertil, who played ice hockey in North America, argued that the fights in North American ice hockey were more honest than those in Swedish hockey. The reason for this, Bertil said, was that the fights were agreed on beforehand and that the ‘goon’ in each team arranged the fights on the substitute’s bench before the change-over (interview with Bertil). Being a part of the entertaining logic of ice hockey, the players therefore knew when a fight would start. But according to Bertil, in Swedish hockey the fights ‘appeared’ more rhapsodic and as a player you never knew when you would get a fist or a slashing. In this way, violence in Swedish hockey was more unpredictable and dishonest.

Research has shown the violent past of ice hockey (e.g. Lorenz, 2015; Vaz, 1982; Weinstein et al., 1995) and, perhaps not surprisingly, Bertil and the other informants argued that the game was rougher before and that there were more open-ice fights in the past than there are now. Placing these actions in the past, they all argued that the battle element was part of the game and the tactics. Adam confessed that he had encouraged players to ‘provoke but not get provoked’ and continued:

I have to be honest and confess that I have told players to ‘go in and pick a fight with him and make sure we get him off the ice!’ That is to say, make sure you each get a two [two minutes expulsion] so we can play four against four, because then we get more space *laughs*. It’s part of the game! It’s a fight in which at least one player goes in to consciously provoke. It is not anger or rage that is triggered there. (Interview with Adam)

None of the other coaches were as explicit as this in their use of fights (physical violence) as a strategy. Rather, they pointed to the role of the media and mentioned a well-known TV journalist who clearly encouraged a more ‘physical hockey’, with a lot of checking and a kind of eye-for-an-eye-and-a-tooth-for-a-tooth mentality. As a result, as both Erik and Ceasar indicated, the violence in the game tended to be glorified in and by the TV media, which was considered harmful to ice hockey, and particularly for children who often adopted and mimicked such attitudes. The media was thus regarded as influencing and even promoting violent behaviour in ice hockey. These narratives underline the role of the rules and the competitive logic in reproducing hegemonic masculinity in ice hockey.

The stabilising and transformative role of a competitive environment

The competitive logic supports a hegemonic masculinity (Connell, 2005; English, 2017; Flood & Dyson, 2007). In short, this logic forms and legitimises hierarchies and, thus, the sorting of certain characteristics in a powered pattern that could marginalise or subordinate some players and include or embrace others. That is, it works within a team, but also between a team and a coach as well as between different teams and so forth.

Based on data from the interviews, it could be argued that the role of competition not only has a stabilising effect on the construction of a dominant, hegemonic masculinity, but could also function as a transformative feature. The coaches talked a lot about the importance of forming a respectful and democratic culture. However, as the informants indicated, this was easier said than done. David, for example, described his experience of working in youth teams in negative terms, i.e. teams in which not everybody feels comfortable enough to express their feelings. David had developed an ability to identify such a climate, which in practice could be difficult for coaches and leaders to observe, especially if they themselves were part of the culture. When asked about the specific ‘symptoms’ of such a preclusive climate, David clarified and said that a team’s penalties for misconduct and players shouting at opponents and referees were the most obvious. According to David, these were warning signs that showed that the coaches had not been able put limits on what was acceptable and not acceptable to verbally express during a game. David added that a coach could not expect players to be conscious of or able to highlight or problematise such attitudes on their own. He continued by saying that:

It’s not that the players are sad or collapse, but there can be a tough climate in these changing rooms and some players do not dare to protest because they [the dominant players] are perhaps a bit bigger and a bit stronger. (Interview with David)

Here it is important to underline that the creation of a decent and more respectful climate was motivated by the instrumental goal of better performances and competition results. That is, the competitive logic justified the elimination of sexist and derogative comments and that the removal of these was not explained or perceived as having intrinsic democratic value. The main motive was thus to win more matches and to keep more players (i.e. talent) in the team.

In this sense, the significance of the competition logic’s connection to the preservation of a hegemonic masculinity can be interpreted in a more nuanced way as a supporting component that also had the potential to redefine the content of what was considered as hegemonic. This way of reasoning is in line with Connell’s (2005) description of a hegemonic masculinity as contradictory to its content. The solution to the problematic aspects of competitions is thus not to prohibit them, but to rather redefine the purpose and change the way in which they are carried out.

This way of taking advantage of (intended) improved performances became a central strategy for coaches wanting to modify players’ language. The challenge for a coach in such a situation was to convince the dominant players that derogative language, open protests or disrespectful attitudes did not win games or lead to success, but rather the opposite. David, who seemed to be the most experienced of the coaches in group dynamics argued that, ‘It’s about working out a common agreement’ amongst the players and the coaches.

David pointed to another ambiguity of ice hockey, namely that as players, coaches and leaders spend a lot of time together in training sessions, matches or tournaments this could nurture negative language, although on the other hand this time-consuming socialising could be seen as a necessary prerequisite for the development of a more inclusive and democratic culture. Thus, our informants’ statements nuanced Pappas et al.’s (2004) point that this was something that was crucial for the development of a female-objectifying culture and also crucial for managing the same. Being conscious of its problematic aspects, David related to time-consuming socialising as a progressive potential and underlined that it was important for coaches to work with the players on their language and attitudes and help them to develop good habits.

With these findings in mind, the next section describes the preventative measures and best practices suggested by the coaches in their narratives.

Implications for practice: towards a violence prevention programme in ice hockey

Based on the findings of this and other studies it is clear that violence prevention measures should be introduced in order to minimise the risk of hockey players becoming violent outside the rink. Inspired by Flood’s (2019) work on violence prevention amongst men and boys, the three suggestions outlined below are based on a critical perspective on men and masculinities and the pursuit of increased gender equality. Besides individual, face-to-face, educational efforts, an effective programme should also employ preventative interventions at the meso- and macro levels (Flood, 2019). Although these interventions are unlikely to change the entire ice hockey culture, they do provide a framework for the acquisition of additional relevant content.

Preventative action no. 1: to erase sexist and derogative attitudes and actions so that they do not escalate

There is a need to make men and women in general in ice hockey more conscious about sexism, homophobia and other derogative attitudes by introducing violence preventative interventions (Flood, 2019). Flood and Pease (2009) show that men’s boundaries are wider in terms of allowing sexism than women’s. Therefore, an initial step in the management of sexist language, would be for coaches to understand what sexism is and why it is problematic. Common agreements about such behaviour concern individuals at the team level, club level, league level and national policy level. For a player, coach, commissioner or sport manager, the initial step would be to understand what derogative, sexist or disrespectful attitudes are and why they are risk factors for (some) individuals and their organisation. This sends a clear message to the national federation on the importance of providing a sensitivity awareness programme.

Ideally, this would provide management with tools that informed, challenged and changed such behaviour and encouraged a more inclusive and democratic culture. The alternative of not intervening in this type of verbal violence would increase the risk of a degrading culture being established (Flood, 2019, p. 135). At best, the initiative for culture-changing work is introduced by people in management positions at team, club and national association levels.

A key component of any prevention programme should be to encourage individuals to express different views at group level, i.e. to break ‘the spiral of silence’ (Noelle-Neumann, 1974; Steen-Johnsen & Enjolras, 2016). The coaches in this study, and in the interviews with players in the project as a whole, indicate that the power of the team is considerable in such issues (Alsarve & Angelin, 2019). As a best practice, the intervention should eliminate the risk of ‘whistleblowers’ being perceived as ‘traitors’ by the dominant group (Flood, 2019).

Coaches are role models and need to be careful about the kinds of conscious or unconscious messages they communicate to players (e.g. Weinstein et al., 1995). Altering the climate in a changing room can therefore be a complex task, where not only the team and its coaches need to be involved and engaged in intervention initiatives, but also the entire club and the national association. The multi-level approach is therefore of key importance.

Amongst the informants, David was the person who focused most on the group’s language and attitudes, was able to identify the risk tendencies in teams and see that the management of group dynamics was necessary in order to improve the team’s sporting performances. In other words, the intervention interacts with the competitive logic, which is a vital part of the construction of the hegemonic masculinity in sport (English, 2017; Flood & Dyson, 2007). Providing coaches with training that enables and encourages them to intervene in difficult situations is therefore necessary.

Preventative action no. 2: zero tolerance of alcohol consumption and drugs

Although there is no single or one-sided masculinity ideal in ice hockey, coaches’ and players’ attitudes towards women/femininity, pornography and alcohol appear to be crucial (cf. Flood, 2019). Besides the risk factors highlighted above, the excessive consumption of alcohol seems to trigger violent behaviour outside the rink (Crosset, 1999; Frintner & Rubinson, 1993; Pappas et al., 2004). As the majority of coaches agreed that team parties could be drunken affairs, it would seem to be essential to implement a zero tolerance policy. There have also been examples of the media exposing ice hockey teams’ and players’ drinking habits. One example is the coverage of a player being charged with threatening a civil servant and violent resistance (Tolén, 2018) and another is that of a team captain being accused of having made a racist comment during a restaurant brawl (Mattsson, 2017).

Preventative action no. 3: change the rules in order to eliminate hard and reckless play

Finally, aiming at the structural level of the ice hockey culture, Flood states that: ‘Direct experiences of violent victimisation are influential for some men’ (Flood, 2019, p. 142, emphasis added). This underlines the potential problems with ice hockey’s physical violent features, such as checkings and, not least, the constant fights that arise in connection with, for example, goalkeepers’ puck blocking. With Rosenberg and Stevens (2013) findings in mind about condemning morally questionable violent play (in the NHL), together with research showing that boys and men who have witnessed and/or experienced violence are more likely to use violence themselves, implementing rules that erase these kinds of actions from the sport would seem necessary (Flood, 2019; Pappas et al., 2004; Weinstein et al., 1995). In fact, it would be contradictory to encourage professional and appropriate behaviour in the changing room if this was not followed by similar actions on the ice. In line with this suggestion, Vaz (1982) argues for a change in the point system so that not only goals are counted. That is, a team with few or no penalties should be awarded with points.

To a great extent, the rules and the competitive nature of ice hockey put the male version of the game in a beneficial and dominant position. If this is to change, identical rules need to be introduced to women’s ice hockey as well. Another reason for this is that if open-ice checks were abandoned, the number of concussions would probably decrease. The compulsory use of helmets was an initial step, followed by several rules with the aim in erasing risky play (e.g. checking from behind).

Individual coaches are not responsible for the rules, because this is a question for the national and international ice hockey associations. However, a coach could motivate players to adopt more respectful on-ice behaviour. One promising practice would be the introduction of ‘team rules’ stating that any player who is given a penalty for ‘rough play’ or ‘misconduct’ has to immediately go to the changing room after serving the penalty and not be allowed to play for the rest of the game. The reason for this would be to suppress careless and violent actions and encourage more technical skills.

Conclusion

In the introduction to this article two quotes were cited; one from Flood (2019) and the other from NHL commissioner Bettman (2019). Adding the results from this article, two conclusions are central when designing future prevention programmes. Firstly, several sports appear to be platforms where boys learn aggressiveness and adopt a normalised attitude to violence. Gender separated rules, derogative attitudes and alcohol can, for instance, trigger such negative behaviour. Secondly, which also Bettman (2019) touches on, when changing a culture (such as ice hockey) a change in the culture’s core values is needed. This is also what Crosset (1999) suggests when arguing that it is the values generating the content of hegemonic masculinity that should be redefined so that men and women are given similar opportunities to shape it. This is why feminism and gender equality should permeate the intervention work (Flood, 2019). According to Schwery and Cade (2009), by changing the rules and challenging the core values of ice hockey culture this sport could have a major impact on reducing anti-social behaviour and violence elsewhere.

The aim of this paper was to identify the masculinity ideals in need of interventions. It has shown how such ideals often have a dualistic or contradictory content and that instead of reproducing the current state, they could be employed to change it. Identified as components of the ice hockey culture and ‘natural’ parts of the game and community, rules that trigger fights, harsh and careless playing styles, a normalising of sexist and derogatory attitudes/language and an exaggerated alcohol consumption, are treated as key areas for preventative actions. The main conclusion that can be drawn from this article is that a successful violence prevention programme in ice hockey, and perhaps also in other male dominated team sports, should pay specific attention to such areas with the aim of minimising the risk of players developing violent and negative attitudes towards women and other men that nurture patriarchy and inequality.

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their comprehensive comments that substantially improved the article. The author would also like to thank the Region of Örebro county and The Swedish Research Council for Sport Science for funding this research and the members of the research group ReShape (Research in Sport, Health and Physical Education) at Örebro University, for commenting on an earlier version of this paper.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Region Orebro County [grant number 17RS3631]; The Swedish Research Council for Sport Science: [grant number D2019-0039].