Docile Body Theory

Having previously discussed the main tenets of the most pervasive sociological theories employed by sport sociologists, the next section will now expand on the critical paradigm and specifically how it will be incorporated to inform my own research moving forward.
In consideration of the primary research questions, critical theory proves fruitful as it can be used to identify how organized sports in Canada have been employed systematically to morally regulate Aboriginal peoples by reinforcing dominant Eurocentric norms. Specifically, critical theory enables the appropriate examination of how sport policy in Canada has historically and contemporarily been used as a mechanism of social control to target this group, which has ultimately resulted
However, a docile body must first be defined in accordance with the facilitation of this conditioning of docility that Foucault describes. According to Foucault (1977), a docile body is, a “body that is manipulated, shaped, trained, which obeys, responds, becomes skillful and increases its forces” (pp. 136). To clarify, from a Foucauldian perspective, bodies (or individuals) become docile due to the occurrence of ruling powers developing methods, systems, and structures for governing and regulating actors.. To this end, Foucault’s concept of the docile body is useful for examining the attempt of forcefully constructing Aboriginal identities within the institutional practices of residential schools, which worked to shape and control youth through various means including: abuse through beatings; punishments for speaking Aboriginal languages and practicing cultural traditions; bondage and confinement in unsanitary conditions; sexual abuse; forced labour; and exposure to Eurocentric sporting practices (Kirmayer, et al,. 2003; Te Hiwi, 2012). Correspondingly, these institutions became prominent mechanisms incorporated by the federal government to create docile bodies through moral regulation and discipline, which is demonstrated through several facts and in particular: that the schools were located in isolate areas; the children were allowed minuscule to zero contact with their families and communities; and there was a strict system that incorporated severe discipline and perpetual surveillance in all facets of their lives (Kirmayer, et al,.