Paralympics show us we should include more people in experience of sport - Alice Soper

Anna Grimaldi of New Zealand celebrates after winning bronze during the women's 100m T47 final at the Paris 2024 Paralympic Games. Photo / Getty Images

So much of the conversation in sport these days seems to be overtaken by a single debate, asking whether we should be focused on inclusion or focused on fairness in our competitions.

The framing of these discussions appears to place the two notions at odds, suggesting that nothing fair will be inclusive and nothing inclusive will be fair.

The pursuit of fairness is fraught but there is a way to get there. However, it requires us to embrace, not oppose, the concept of inclusion.

Starting from this basis, fairness is the outcome of the process. The more inclusive our origins, the more fair our outcomes. We are witnessing an example of this in real-time right now at the Paris Paralympic Games.

At its centre is a group of athletes traditionally excluded from sport as our limited worldview limited what we believed they could accomplish. Forgetting the one truth of sport, that it was all made up at one point in history to suit the interests and abilities of the target participant.

By starting with inclusion, suddenly we could consider what adaptations could be made to support the participation of a wider range of abilities – the outcome of which is a competition that is both fierce and fair.

There are currently 29 separate events for the 100m race alone at these Paralympics. Alongside gender, the disabilities of individuals are accounted for as they are separated into their respective classes.

By starting with inclusion, para athletes with physical, visual and intellectual impairments are all able to have a shot at gold. Anyone witnessing these events would never call them unfair.

Outside of the Paralympic spotlight, however, there is still advocacy from within disabled communities to go further still. To continue to push for greater inclusion and thus a fairer representation of the range of para athletes’ abilities on display at this pinnacle event. This will require organisers to interrogate what they deem an “acceptable disability”. In turn, reflecting on what message these choices send to the wider community about who is worthy of celebration.

The part left unsaid is how some people equate inclusion to participation, falsely believing that broadening inclusion waters down competition.

Such an opinion is at odds with the actions of virtually all sporting organisations who each list growing participation numbers as a core performance indicator in the health of their sport. Understanding that by growing the player pool, you also grow competition amongst those wishing to attain higher honours.

Much is done to attract new participants in non-disabled spaces. We offer tasters, modifying our games to meet people at their level of ability. It has taken nearly 100 years for us to look beyond non-disabled boys and men as the sole participants in most sports.

So it’s perhaps unsurprising that we have been slow to embrace our para athletes. But we aren’t doing anyone any favours by giving wider access to sport. It is simply doing the job of sports administration.

Therein lies the true tension in modern sports. Not fairness versus inclusion but the fairness of our inclusions. Who we deem sport is for and in making these choices, who we tell it isn’t.

Slowly we are moving away from the idea that sport is solely the pursuit of non-disabled cis men. The joy of observing the athletic excellence competing at the Paralympics is undeniable, so it’s only fair that we include more people in that experience.