Assisting Abusers: How Hockey's Approach to Harm Prevents Accountability
Content warning: Discussions about sexual violence.
This is part of an ongoing series on hockey culture and masculinity. Check out the previous piece, Is Conformity the Hidden Cause of Harm in Hockey Culture?.
This week, we’re delving into some of the many problems that have been exposed in hockey’s culture, which means it gets pretty dark. It’s necessary to outline the severity of the problems to know what we’re up against…but stick with me, future pieces will turn to solutions and hope!
‘You People’ and ‘My People’: Who is Considered a Hockey Player?
Last week, we discussed how Russian sniper, Alexander Ovechkin, had received sharp criticism for celebrating a milestone goal by pretending his stick was on fire.
One of the comments I left out was from former presenter Don Cherry who compared it to “those goofy soccer guys,” while encouraging kids to ignore the celebrations and instead act the “Canadian way.”
Cherry, known for his fiery tirades and extravagant suits, dominated Canadian TV screens every Saturday for 39 years until his removal in 2019 after referring to migrants as “you people” in a rant about Remembrance Day.
Deconstructing ‘Tough’
Perhaps no one did as much as Cherry to define the ideal hockey player as being white, tall, bearded, hailing from a rural North American community (especially Western Canadian farms) and ‘tough.’ I am only mildly exaggerating when I say it is more important to not be considered ‘soft’ than it is to actually be good at hockey.
Europeans, and especially Russians, are often considered soft until proven otherwise by the hockey community. I believe this mindset is changing but a recent interview with Ottawa Senators General Manager Pierre Dorion reminded me just how slowly it takes for that change to happen with those closest to the game. In it he referred to his star player Tim Stützle as “having character for a European.” This is all because the style of game played across the pond is seen as prioritizing skill over physicality. And being skilled takes one dangerously close to being selfish.
Whereas by contrast, selflessness means sacrificing one’s body for the team: hitting people whenever possible, blocking shots, and playing through injury.
Taking penalties is also considered a hallmark of a player who plays ‘hard.’ Of course it’s bad to take too many, but not taking enough can be seen as a detriment on a players scouting profile. Breaking the rules and putting your team a man down is, curiously, not considered selfish in most cases.
Misogyny in Hockey
The Sedin twins are Vancouver Canucks legends. They each finished their careers with over 1000 points, currently holding the 68th and 78th positions in all-time scoring.
Their style of play relied on passing the puck along the boards and inviting players to hit them. This paired with their unmatched chemistry meant when one was being checked they would be able to find the other one who was open. Playing this way requires an incredible level of fitness as you are stopping and starting frequently while another professional athlete attempts to inhibit your movement.
So were the Sedins considered soft or tough? Outside of Vancouver often the former. You see, they are from Sweden, and hitting people, not playing through checks, determines toughness. This combined with their unique play style meant they were ‘othered’—belittled foremost by having their masculinity called into question.
At the peak of their careers, a rival player, Dave Bolland, referred to them as the Sedin “Sisters” on numerous occasions (an ‘insult’ that followed them around throughout their careers) and suggested they sleep together in bunk beds.These attempts to infantilize and feminize them, in part for being “foreign” and in part for being skilled, tell us not only who belongs in hockey, but who doesn’t.
Homophobia, Sexual Abuse & Accountability
The Chicago Blackhawks were just awarded the first overall pick in the upcoming NHL entry draft. They had the third best odds in the lottery knocking Anaheim and Columbus down to second and third. First overall is always a huge boon but it is especially so this year as Connor Bedard, the best prospect since Connor McDavid—the consensus best player in the world—is available.
They never should have had a pick.
In 2010 Blackhawks management was made aware that their video coach Brad Aldrich was sexually abusing rookie Kyle Beach.
They not only covered it up but in the aftermath provided Aldrich with a positive final evaluation and allowed him to have a day with the Stanley Cup before being let go. He went on to victimize high school students after his departure from Chicago. One student alleges these actions helped Aldrich get the position at their school, which the Blackhawks deny.
Former players claim that the whole team knew about the abuse, including the aforementioned Bolland, and made homophobic ‘jokes’ about the abuse at Beach’s expense.
Last year the Blackhawks were fined 2 million dollars by the NHL as a result of this news becoming public. Over 2.5 million dollars of season ticket packages were sold the same day they won the draft lottery.
Was the Blackhawks’ organization properly held accountable? Especially considering their owner’s extreme (even disturbing) reluctance to describe changes they’d implement to ensure this never happened again. Despite their knowledge, cover up, and facilitation of abuse, they were still given a first round draft pick. In contrast, both the New Jersey Devils and Arizona Coyotes have recently been stripped of first round picks for relatively minor transgressions: the signing of an egregious, though ultimately legal, contract and holding prohibited pre-draft workouts.
Patriarchy in Hockey
I’ve used these examples to demonstrate the misogyny and homophobia that are rampant in hockey—both symptoms of living in a patriarchal culture
Unfortunately, in arenas around the country you will hear ‘p*ssy’ and even ‘f*g’—slurs—used as synonyms for ‘soft’. The message is clear: the worst thing a male hockey player could ever be is female, feminine, or queer.
There has been some vocal pushback to the idea that the numerous sexual assault scandals plaguing hockey are a reflection of the culture but these voices are actually in the minority: 56% of people who have played, coached, or officiated alongside 63% of those with close proximity to the game viewed misogyny as a problem before the Hockey Canada and Blackhawks news broke.
So what’s the problem with patriarchal ideas about masculinity and exclusionary ideas about who belongs in hockey? And how does this tie into the culture of conformity we talked about last week?
Off-Ice Accountability is Begrudging at Best
In short, these attitudes shape what kind of behaviour we see on and off the ice, who is upheld as role models, what kind of conduct is excused or overlooked (and from whom), and why there is so much fear about speaking out against abuse.
Players who fit the ‘Canadian’—or at least, ‘North American’—white, and ‘tough’ masculine ideal are given a longer leash and more opportunities than those who are not. What behaviour is considered a distraction, “goofy,” or salvageable depends in part on this as well.
In the fall of 2022 the Boston Bruins attempted to sign Mitchell Miller. Miller had repeatedly and viciously bullied a Black classmate with a disability for years, referring to him as a n****r and assaulting him amongst a slew of other horrific behaviour for which he had never apologized until the signing.
The Bruins claimed to have done a thorough investigation but after backlash forced them to terminate the contract they revealed they had never spoken to the victim’s family or their own leadership group and thought only one ‘isolated’ incident had occurred. All of this information had become publicly available after this whole series of events played out two years prior when the Arizona Coyotes drafted Miller before withdrawing the pick.
It’s important to outline how extreme expectations of conformity informs hockey culture to see why abusers are protected.
The arrogance of the Bruins’ and Coyotes’ decisions comes from a reverence of ‘good hockey boys.’ If one conforms they are part of the in-group, then the assumption is that whatever they are accused of must be overblown. This protection ceases to function in the case of being abused, however, as ‘tough’ men would never put themselves in that position. A player (or coach) is also unlikely to call out a teammate for any actions off the ice as this goes against the extreme ethos of winning before everything else. After all, the Blackhawks cared more about winning the Cup than Kyle Beach.
Interested in access to free mental health support? Check out MEN& to access free counseling if you’re a man in Alberta.
I hope this article has helped to illuminate why talk of second chances always comes up before the accountability necessary to meaningfully make amends for the first chance in hockey.
Next week I’ll expand on how both players and the game suffer when the win-at-all-costs mentality glorifies pain and sacrifice.
Blake Holtsbaum is a volunteer with Next Gen Men and a recent graduate of Mount Royal University with a degree in public policy. He has been all over the world, most recently living in South East Asia. He is passionate about maps and mountains and is an advocate for refugee rights.