As a long jumper who has represented Great Britain since 2007, and competed in the 2020 Tokyo Olympics, I’ve seen firsthand the inequalities that women face in elite sports.
As sportswomen, our bodies are intrinsically linked to our ability to perform at an elite level. But, unlike men, whose hormonal states remain pretty consistent, we have to strategise with the precision of an engineer around hormones and menstruation, desperately hoping that heavy blood flow and pain won’t fall in competition time, which could mean the difference between winning and losing an Olympic medal.
And what about pregnancy? For many women — deeply unfairly — it spells the end of their career. In very recent history, female athletes were punished for getting pregnant – contracts were cut, funding was dropped, careers were scuppered.
Few were in a position to make the choice of family versus career, as the choice was taken away from them by the corporations that financially supported them. And on occasion, when they did have that choice, some found themselves making the decision to terminate their pregnancy, feeling backed into a corner and forced to prioritise career over family.
For those who go ahead and have children, the way back into elite sports can feel impossible. Beyond fans, federations and funding sources writing them off, women find themselves, as Tiffany Porter says, in ‘a whole new body’ after giving brith. Many are left wondering, will I ever be able to come back?
Yet, despite this reality, it is clear that mothers excel in elite sport. After giving birth to her son, Zyon, in 2017 Jamaican sprint-queen, Shelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce returned to the track with a blistering 10.60s over 100 metres and snatched two additional World Championship titles (2019 and 2022)!
So why are institutions and brands so slow to recognise the power of motherhood in sports?
In 2014, six-time USA Champion, Alysia Montaño received a 50% cut to her Asics contract because she failed to hit her performance minimums… whilst pregnant! And in 2017, Nike slashed the contract of the most decorated female Olympian in track and field athletics by 70% when Felix sought to renegotiate during her pregnancy.
Elite sportswomen who have babies also face unique financial repercussions. New mum and three times Paralympian, Laurie Williams highlights that, for women in elite sports, income comes from commercial contracts or national governing bodies, which is not the same as being employed, with the rights you’d enjoy in a mainstream job.
For sportswomen, contracts often offer a low base salary, with primary earnings tied to performance-based bonuses. It’s ‘no races; no income’, meaning women are essentially financially punished for taking time out to have a baby. And when women return to competition postpartum, their initial performance level is understandably lower as their bodies readjust, leading to further financial loss.
Thankfully, after Allyson Felix broke her silence and spoke up against these punitive, discriminatory terms, Nike expanded protections for contracted pregnant sportswomen, guaranteeing athlete pay and bonuses for 18 months around pregnancy. Governing bodies, such as UK Sport have also lowered the barriers surrounding motherhood for elite female athletes who will now retain their funding during pregnancy and for nine months after birth.
So - though the institutional and lifestyle barriers that exist for mothers in elite sport may seem overwhelming, from outdated contractual terms to sleep deprivation and planning childcare around training demands - there is hope.
Commercial giants and institutions are now safeguarding the financial security of pregnant and new mums as a contractual right. Athletes are smashing previously-perceived limitations attached to motherhood with postpartum personal best performances. As Team USA sprint-hurdler Christina Clemons put so powerfully: ‘[my son] wasn’t my demise in the sport.’