Anti-doping ironism

Abstract

This paper discusses the potential of anti-doping ironism. It identifies anti-doping fundamentalism as a serious ethical problem producing unnecessary harms, not least for athletes accused, caught or sanctioned in connection with doping offences. Ironism is introduced as a welcome contrast to fundamentalism, encouraging the development of more compassionate and just policy and rhetoric. Building on Richard Rorty’s account of liberal ironism, the anti-doping ironist is presented as a person that supplements anti-doping commitment with an idiosyncratic ethical responsiveness to people with different beliefs from hers. In line with this idiosyncrasy, she seeks to learn from the experiences of ‘doped athletes’ and draws on these in order to redescribe her commitments in more fruitful ways. Narratives are principal sources for the ironist. Accordingly, the paper explores two road cyclists’ ‘confessional autobiographies’ as narratives that speak to the anti-doping ironist’s ethical responsiveness to difference.