Introduction

The spectacularization of sport produces and is produced amid gestures and sports results that flirt with surprise, the unusual, and the imponderable, triggering different emotions and moving millionaire figures, especially when starred by male athletes. There is no doubt that sport occupies a central position in contemporary society and, both yesterday and today, constitute a powerful territory of expression and transformation of gender relations (^{Hall, 2005}). Its history denotes that it was erected as a space reserved for the masculine (^{Dunning; Maguire, 2010}), and, despite its changes, it is still perpetuated and maintained as a place strongly associated with masculinity (^{Matthews, 2015}), especially hegemony (^{Connell; Messerchmidt, 2013}).

In this scenario, many discourses regulate women's participation, which moves between different fields, whether medical, media, or legal, designating women as fragile and sensitive, affirming the masculinization of their bodies when potentialized, supposing the consequent loss of grace and beauty (^{Devide, 2005}; ^{Jaeger; Goellner, 2011}). However, anchored in feminist and gender studies that question the predominance of biological discourses, we understand that the bodily differences that position men and women hierarchically are social, cultural, and historical constructions (^{Goellner, 2013}) that have changed or disappeared over time due to women's struggles to expand their sports participation (^{Ferreira; Salles; Mourão; Moreno, 2013}). In Brazil, women are currently inserted in most sports modalities and question, react, contest, and exhibit plural femininities in the face of classificatory discourses that position sports modalities as male or female (^{Adelman, 2006}; ^{Jaeger; Goellner, 2011}).

In the wake of these ideas, it is necessary to assume that gender is a useful category of historical analysis (^{Scott, 1995}), whose understanding is based on the notion that subjects perform gender in an engineered, repeated, and daily manner (^{Butler, 2016}). In this sense, bodies generalize and are generalized in the sports field, marked by sexuality, disability, ethnicity/race, physicality, generation, and social class, which integrate a tangle of experiences that limit the participation of some and enhance that of others (^{Goellner, 2010}). The generalization of bodies is continuously crossed by power relations, allowing us to understand that power is exercised and organized in networks, producing discourses and knowledge (^{Foucault, 2018}) that regulate the presence of certain subjects in the sports context since the school period (^{Altmann, 2015}). However, where there is power, there is also resistance, which operates to modify it since power is relational and tensioned by multiple points of resistance distributed irregularly in time and space (^{Foucault, 1999}; ²⁰¹⁸).

In this context, such considerations extend to teacher training in Physical Education since this field emerges with different gender and power relations constantly rehearsed, produced, and reproduced, becoming a space conducive to resistance actions. Studies show that teacher training in Physical Education does not address gender relations in the compulsory curriculum, leaving the issue in the interest of teachers or some conflicting situation that requires discussion (^{Araújo, 2015}; ^{Santos, 2016}). There are still future teachers who consider different body and sports practices for men and women within the program (^{Santos; Silva, 2015}). This is evidence that the gender stereotypes present in sports affect the students of the teacher training course, hindering the exercise of critical awareness in search of the transformation of their future teaching practices, reinforcing the need for the inclusion of these discussions in initial training (^{Piedra; Rodríguez-Fernández, 2016}).

From these considerations, we aim to analyze gender relations and, in particular, the exercises of power and resistance that emerge among students in the collective sports courses in a teacher training program in Physical Education.

Methodological paths

We used a qualitative approach¹ characterized by the process and interpretation of the researched context, situated in a social, cultural, and political scenario, which places the researchers as part of the research production (^{Creswell, 2014}), resorting to the look inspired by ethnography that proposes an immersion in the context to be researched (^{Angrosino, 2009}).

The participants consisted of 86 students enrolled in a Physical Education - Licenciature program who attended collective sports courses, of which 15 came from soccer, 28 from volleyball, 19 from basketball, and 24 from handball. Each course consists of 60 hours, including theoretical and practical classes that take place according to their specificity, either in the classroom, in the multisport gym, or, in the case of soccer, on the field.

The research sources were participant observation, focus groups, and individual interviews. The observations were conducted in each course between August and November 2019, at least once a week, during visits to the gyms, soccer fields, and classrooms, according to the methodological strategy of the teacher responsible for each course. All observations were recorded in field journals (FJ) (^{Creswell, 2014}). In a second moment, four focus groups (FG) were established (^{Barbour, 2009}), one for each course, consisting of 25 students interacting with a script of questions. Finally, we conducted 16 semi-structured interviews with four students from each course. We use fictitious names to refer to them. A digital device was used to record the manifestations of the FG and interviews, and the material was then transcribed in full. Thus, all research sources resulted in 263 typed pages subjected to data triangulation, aggregating the FJ, FG, and interviews to help validate the study's quality (^{Gibbs, 2009}).

All the material produced was organized using the Nvivo 12 software and subsequently examined using the lens of Foucaultian-inspired discourse analysis. This authorizes us to question discourses produced as true at a given moment. At the same time, it allows us to go through the manifestations of discontinuities and dispersions of the relationships that emerge between the subjects of the statements, which intersect, abandon, and exclude each other, constituting other discourses (^{Foucault, 2014}). Thus, we seek to analyze the discourses instituted by a set of utterances that are repeated, transformed, reactivated, invented and reinvented, said and not said (^{Foucault, 2008}), interrogating them and multiplying their meanings and possibilities, which are strongly crossed by power relations (^{Paraíso, 2014}). It is essential to perceive the discourses that emerge between men and women in team sports classes and the discursive processes that constituted them over time, resulting in three instances presented below.

The centers of the sports court

The form of playing, the sporting gesture, the skills, the moments before and after classes, and the breaks made possible an entanglement of gender relations between students, men and women, in the collective sports courses in teacher training in Physical Education. To break down this tangle, we assume that gender relations constitute the identities of the subjects crossed by different markers and questioned by multiple social institutions (^{Louro, 2014}), among which sport emerges. The sports field is susceptible to repeated performance, as proposed by ^{Butler (2016)}. It is generalized and generalizes the bodies of the subjects who practice it as it engenders representations of men and women, educates, produces, and challenges other bodies to their reproduction (^{Goellner, 2016}).

Anchored in these notions, we searched the sources and noticed that, among the different statements that mark the bodies of men and women, sports ability and strength at the intersection with different social markers emerge as powerful discursive elements that hierarchize the bodies and are the target of dispute during the classes in which the games constituted the center of the teaching and learning process. Let's see:

I notice that some men throw harder; the three I noticed are white, tall, and skilled in the sport. There was a moment when Marcela, who is on the University handball team, threw hard, and her male colleagues shouted: 'Hey!', impressed with her strength (^{Myllena, 2019}).

[...]

In Team B, Daniela scored goals, showed great football skills, and played aggressively in individual ball disputes. Also, Maicon, a student with autism, was very aggressive when recovering possession of the ball and constituted the team's defense (^{Myllena, 2019}).

[...]

I think, in volleyball, there was a superiority of the boys in the attack. With a lot of strength like that [...] like, I don't attack like that, and Larissa and Maisa attacked normally. I think they [men] do it to show “Look how I am, how I know” (^{Manuela, 2019}).

[...]

The girl was free, and even so, they did not pass the ball to her and even changing places, it is noticeable that the people look for the most skilled and not the best positioned. And I think that gives a lot of problems in the sport [...] (^{Inácio, 2019}).

The speeches that enunciate and position men and women on the sports courts indicate that both strength and the demonstration of skills authorize certain subjects to occupy the best and most requested positions in sports. In the four sports, we observed that the use of force emerges as a discursive category that anchors the classification of fit and unfit bodies for sports. If, on the one hand, this marker historically represented and justified the male predominance in sport, on the other, it delegated women a secondary position due to their supposed fragility, delicacy, and grace (^{Hargreaves, 1986}). We note that the subjects who strive to exhibit strength and ability are mostly white men without disabilities. However, when we dive into the discourses that cross and constitute sports practices in class, we notice that there are men with disabilities and women who seek protagonism. These results corroborate the findings of another study that states that aggressiveness and strength in sports are exercised by both men and women (^{Stanger; Kavussanu; Ring, 2016}).

Analyzing the excerpts presented also allows us to understand that the central and peripheral positions in the spaces of the games integrated gender relations in the researched scenario, locating subjects in sometimes more or less privileged positions. Although such places do not define all the subjects' experiences in sports classes, it is worth noting that they constituted an instance that complexified the relationships between the students throughout the researched courses.

Thus, in the four sports modalities, the central positions on the courts were primarily occupied by men and, rarely, by women, both with abilities. In contrast, women occupied secondary and marginal positions. The statements also suggest subjects, usually men, who are required by their skills and not by the best position since, even when the positions on the court were alternated, those with enhanced sports performances were preferred. However, being a man and skilled allows one to act as a protagonist of any sport, regardless of the distribution of positions on the court/field.

In this sense, we emphasize that gender relations allow some more privileged men in matters of race/ethnicity and class to dominate the sports territory since these attributes give them more possibilities and resources for access to sports (^{Hall, 1990}). However, the nuances of these relationships, such as women protagonists of the sports scene, may be the effect of hegemonic masculinity that challenges women to adhere to the same attitudes that some men use as a requirement for successful participation in sports (^{English, 2017}). On the other hand, the claims of the 3rd feminist wave begin to assume competitiveness as a behavior inherent to sport (^{Hall, 2005}) and not as an exclusivity of male representation (^{Goellner, 2016}). These aspects can encourage girls to perform new identities and break with gender binarism (^{Azzarito; Katzew, 2010}).

Research sources also indicate that men who are more engaged in sports use the breaks or end of classes to continue playing and develop their sports potential. These cutouts help us understand the effects of the discourses that cross the classes, which are produced and reproduced from school Physical Education, whose strategies and contents educate boys and girls differently. At the beginning and during classes, boys experience activities related to football, for example, while girls occupy the surroundings of the courts, acting in other activities that are not sports (^{Uchoga, 2012}). These situations are not Brazilian prerogatives since studies produced in schools in England and South Africa, conducted alternatively to classes, found that sports spaces and activities were directed more frequently to boys - girls and some boys were sometimes excluded and, invariably, needed to claim spaces to play (^{Clark; Paechter, 2007}; ^{Mayeza, 2016}). Therefore, these representations that emerge from school are repeated in the initial training of physical education teachers, creating a vicious circle that hinders the collapse of unequal gender relations that constitute sports practices.

Thus, we realized that the sports skills and demonstration of strength associated with the different social markers manifested constituted a central element for specific students to occupy privileged positions in the games, primarily white men without disabilities and who performed heterosexuality. This situation allows us to understand that the teacher training of this research site often reproduces the sports canon in which some women open gaps and break down barriers. While this scenario occurs in the sports courts' centers, other subjects occupy their outskirts, as we will see below.

The outskirts of the sports court

The gender relations that emerged from the research sources constituted subjects marked by multiple plots, whose effects position male and female academics differently in the courses of collective sports in teacher education. Men and women are constructed through repeated discursive practices" [...] in and through power relations" (^{Louro, 2014}, p. 45, our translation), which enable the exercise and circulation of power in a network (^{Foucault, 2018}). The subjects exercise power and move it in such a way as to “[...] incite, induce, divert, make easy or difficult, limit and enlarge, make more or less probable [...] ", thus establishing a relationship of forces (^{Eizirik, 2005}, p. 74, our translation).

While some students exercised power in different ways and more than once, others were positioned on the outskirts of the sports courts/fields. From this perspective, we examined the FJ, FG, and interviews and noticed at various times that most women and some men had supporting participation in the games, moments in which men positioned themselves as protagonists of the sports scene, as we observe in the following excerpts:

Monica is not sought out in the game; she received the ball once or twice, even being free on the court. Even the teacher suggested that her classmates pass the ball to her since everyone else on the team was marked while she was not, but no one passed (^{Myllena, 2019}).

[...]

That's right. You are in a lower position, which does not perform much in the game; then you are in a position with little performance, and then the others no longer pass the ball to you. And then you stay a whole game without touching the ball, as I already did, just running from one side to the other, pretending, just to form a team (^{Camila, 2019}).

[...]

The game continues, and the men of João's team begin to notice him more in the game, but the ball passes more between the other men, and most of the throws are made by them. João is homosexual, and his manners take him away from the standard behavior of other colleagues and, although he has a particular ability for sports, he is ignored in class (^{Myllena, 2019}).

[...]

Another moment that caught my attention involved a student with a disability who has relative sports ability. The lifter barely passed the ball to him. The number of times the setter passed the ball to the female student concerning the disabled student was much higher. Even a rally happened, and not once did the setter pass the ball to him (^{Myllena, 2019}).

[...]

A Quilombola student, who usually has no interaction between himself and the class, gives up participating in activities halfway through the class. He begins to circulate through the gym in slippers, shorts, headphones, and performing beats on his thighs, suggesting the rhythm he is listening to (^{Myllena, 2019}).

The research sources showed that during sports experiences in class, women incorporate experiences marked by little participation or, often, by total exclusion. Sometimes, female academics with skills in the sport in question are left in the background when they participate in teams with a predominance of men in basketball, handball, football, or volleyball, although the latter less frequently. We observed that other subjects were required to sustain the privileged positions of men in the previous analyses, being positioned as coadjuvants in a relational configuration.

Thus, the discourses that produce and reproduce these relationships that emerge from the sports context allow us to understand that their effects generate different situations. For example, moving around the playing space to prepare tactically but not receiving the ball; occupying positions of the game systems that are commonly less requested; giving up class activities; and, in the case of volleyball, being in an attacking position and not receiving the ball to perform the function. The subjects who live through these experiences, in addition to women, are men marked by homosexuality, disability, and/or non-hegemonic ethnicity, regardless of sports skills. This scenario demonstrates the complexity that marks the interstices of gender relations in team sports.

The subjects who occupied the margins of the sports arena during classes were excluded or spontaneously positioned themselves outside the court - they displayed indelible marks of their identities on their bodies. The fact that their bodies departed from the standard celebrated in the sporting context united them. Gender, disability, Indigenous ethnicity, and non-heterosexual orientation are associated with low sports skills and rejection of competitiveness, constituting representations of interdependencies in which forms of oppression are not hierarchical from the perspective of intersectionality (^{Auad; Corsino, 2018}). Therefore, these different social markers define exclusionary sports practices (^{Goellner, 2010}). Notably, those who deviate from dominant masculinity in sports, in which competitiveness and sports skills prevail, also contribute to different situations of exclusion in the sports scenario (^{Brito; Santos, 2013}).

The interviews and conversations of the FG corroborate the scenes recorded in the FJ, which reproduce power relations that operate as limitations on the participation of men who experience them when they escape the representation of hegemonic masculinity in sports, requiring skills beforehand for successful participation (^{Connell; Messerchmidt, 2013}), but not only that. Above all, they cannot present any disability, and it is not admitted that heterosexuality is not performed. When analyzing the research sources and perceiving the said and the unsaid, we notice the centrality of competitiveness, a vital requirement to affirm referent masculinity, which produces effects that marginalize subjects who do not fit into such attributes and do not want it in the same way (^{English, 2017}).

The existence of enunciations became possible due to discourses that structure gender relations in sports (^{Whitson, 1990}), whose effects of the presence of plural subjects produce a taxonomy on the sports court, building power networks that position others as primary in the games, or even others that are the “[...] effect of power and simultaneously, or by the very fact that it is an effect, its transmission center” (^{Foucault, 2018}, p. 285, our translation).

From the analyses performed, we question the discourses produced to the extent that many women and men who run away from dominant masculinity do not receive the ball, do not actively participate in the game, are not invited to build the plays, and are pushed to supporting positions. What negotiations, actions, and reactions emerge when power relations are exercised? Or does power "always rush from top to bottom, from the center to the outskirts”? (^{Foucault, 2018}, p. 356, our translation). The following analyses invite us to reflect on this.

The possible resistance in the relations between centers and outskirts

The gender relations broken down in the context of the courses of collective sports also make visible actions of resistance that have transformed the exercise of power relations since, as ^{Foucault (2018}, p. 360, our translation) states, “[...] we can always modify its domination under certain conditions and according to a precise strategy”. Thus, it becomes necessary to assume that “[...] where there is power, there is resistance” (^{Foucault, 1999}, p. 91, our translation). This theorization sharpened our eyes and allowed us to observe multiple actions of resistance undertaken by students who act to access and remain in sports and produce other networks of power. Let's look at the following excerpts:

Due to an imbalance in the score between the teams, the teacher stopped the game and requested that everyone gather to reorganize. In this, one of the students of Team B said to the student who was in the goal: “Let me attack; you're taking a lot of goals”, as if she were unable to perform the function. Another colleague repressed him and said: "You're being sexist!”. However, the student was silent and remained in the goal. The game restarted (^{Myllena, 2019}).

[...]

But not because of sex, but because of sexuality, right? Because of my physical, social characteristics, that I take myself more to the effeminate and not to the more masculine side of being a man, so yes, I have to be resisting all the time. [...] It's good that I'm a person who talks a lot and is always active because if I were more withdrawn, it would be another perspective, another everything, so I'm all the time screaming, talking, drawing attention, I draw everyone's attention: “Look what you're doing” (^{João, 2019}).

[...]

So we policed our classmates in class, stopped the game sometimes, and said: 'Oh, you have to let the girls play too, right?’. Because we are participating, we will not be inferior to you. This was more or less the case (^{Luiza, 2019}).

[...]

'So, for example, when we're at a practice and I say to one of them: ‘Ah! You won't let me play!’. At that moment, she resolves no matter how much it happens again, but the speech is effective (^{Michele, 2019}).

[...]

Henrique, a disabled student, strives to learn volleyball in every lesson. His interpreter, the teacher, Miguel, and Larissa help him with this, and he is always very attentive to everything they explain. Today, their skills are already more developed than at the beginning of the semester (^{Myllena, 2019}).

The enunciations allow us to note that students, when resisting, occupy the position of active subjects who negotiate power relations while refuting the idea of being oppressed or passive (^{Azzarito; Solmon; Harrisson, 2006}). By continuously requesting the ball, challenging the exercise of the power of colleagues, ignoring the speeches that aim to repress, remaining on the court, moving, and developing their motor skills, they seek to affirm their presence on the sports field and make their actions visible. Thus, they constitute effects that operate strategically to destabilize the hegemony of male, white, non-disabled, heterosexual, competitive students with improved skills. These resistances do not work in isolation since they were produced during the academic semester, becoming increasingly effective, constituting themselves distinctly while “[...] possible, necessary, improbable, spontaneous, wild, lonely, planned, dragged out, violent, irreconcilable, ready to compromise, interested, or doomed to sacrifice” (^{Foucault, 1999}, p. 91, our translation). Multiple subjects produce different resistances, but, to a large extent, they are women and men who perform bodies that depart from the hegemonic pattern cultivated by the sports field. However, they are subjects who agency their positions and produce strategies to insert themselves and remain in the sports scenario, challenging the environment built by male ideals (^{Clark; Paechter, 2007}).

The analyses also indicate that the different resistance actions are produced by subjects who perceive their colleagues as targets of the power exercised in the game. Thus, in these cases, resistance becomes a strategy that other subjects use to tension the exercise of power, as its effect challenges them. Let's look at some situations:

There was a period when I, Alice, Simone, and Monica were watching the game and, when they noticed that João did not touch the ball, Alice shouted: ‘Send the ball to João! This sucks!’. Nothing changes. Alice continued: 'The kid's not getting the ball!’. Simone says: 'Calm down, Alice!’. She adds: 'But it does! This sucks!’. The game continues, and the other men of João's team begin to perceive him more in the game, although still in scarce demand (^{Myllena, 2019}).

[...]

In an activity of sending the ball from one point to another on the field, it was Cristiane's turn. However, her tall and fast colleague crossed in front of her, caught the ball with his foot, and led it. Her team complained: 'What was that?'; 'It's Cristiane's turn!'; 'Come back! It's not your turn!’. Cristiane's facial expression showed indignation and surprise (^{Myllena, 2019}).

[...]

Sometimes, they pass the ball to women with skills and these to colleagues who occupy secondary positions, performing a midfield (^{Myllena, 2019}).

[...]

Some kids in the class are always looking to pass the ball, and they stop to look like this if we are catching the ball; sometimes I hear, ‘Ah, pass the ball to so-and-so, pass the ball to so-and-so’. I think this is very important, even to help other colleagues to connect as well (^{Antônia, 2019}).

When analyzing the statements, we understand that colleagues use several ways to destabilize power networks. We observed that they vary from the enunciation to notice that the colleague is or is not participating less in the plays to actions within the game to integrate and involve the students who are less requested. The resistances produced by the subject's target of the exercise of power added to these actions by students sensitized to such circumstances contribute to the subjects who do not occupy privileged positions to participate and remain in the game, producing a multiplicity of resistance nodes sewn and distributed throughout the power network, reorganizing it and provoking other subjects and/or groups to engage in its production (^{Grabois, 2011}).

Thus, the relations of power and resistance that alter the experiences of the subjects are constituted through practices that are negotiated, consented to, retreated, require alliances, and repulses, and that act to challenge the cancellation of these subjects (^{Louro, 2014}) in the classes, either by verbalizing to ignite the consciences of other students, or in the involvement of all in the educational process. In the words of ^{Foucault (1999}, p. 90, our translation), the different forms of resistance act in “[...] the role of adversary, target, support, protrusions that allow the grip [...] are present throughout the power network”.

In the wake of these ideas, we realize that resistance is exerted throughout the learning process. By making efforts to amplify their performances during the lessons, they announce a possible action for more effective participation in the games. The rehearsal of these performances was observed as one of the requirements to expand the performance in the classes and was performed more often by women. However, it is important to point out that this is not enough and does not guarantee full participation, as already discussed in this work.

Thus, through multiple resistance strategies, the participants begin to occupy the place of protagonists in some moments and produce “[...] conditions to sustain themselves in a traditionally masculine practice and, as an effect, they tension gender representations” (^{Silva; Nazário, 2018}, p. 12, our translation). It is through punctual, specific, and transgressive practices, such as attracting the attention of colleagues, claiming active participation in games with colleagues, and privileging those who are not recruited in field actions, among other possibilities, that it is possible to destabilize and alter power relations so that the objective is not to eliminate them, but to consider them as a producer agent of multiple possible resistances in the production of transformations (^{Markula, 2003}). Thus, they take positions in the sports territory, break with the practices that limited participation, and, for “[...] remaining in sport, denotes an action of resistance” (^{Jaeger; Gomes; Silva; Goellner, 2010}, p. 261, our translation).

Although resistance aims for equity in team sports classes, new and renewed challenges must be faced since new forms of resistance emerge as necessary to modify the effects of established power networks. Thus, it is essential to realize that these actions do not guarantee full, effective, and extended participation in class since, as the research sources express and ^{Foucault (1999)} enunciates, resistances are transient. They are not hostages to the production of great revolutions but move at different points, remaking themselves daily and repeatedly and producing, each time, new possibilities for resisting power relations.

Final Remarks

The gender relations produced by the students throughout the classes of the collective sports courses in the teacher training program in Physical Education - licenciature emerge amid the power and resistance relations displayed in sometimes screaming, sometimes whispered, silent, in the movement of enunciation speeches, constituting unique, unsettling, and plural records in the research field. Sometimes, they reproduce relationships that emerge from sports and that educate men and women since childhood; other times, they produce relationships that escape the lines of regularity, leaking to other social instances, allowing us to realize that the field of research is complex and requires possibilities to see what is there.

Although organized with different rules and objectives, the four collective sports modalities approach each other to the extent that they are marked by recurrent discursive practice. The protagonist positions and the time in action in the game were experienced by most white men, who perform heterosexuality, and few women, while the supporting situations, marginal spaces, and resistances were more often occupied and produced by women and sparsely by men, who inscribed in their bodies non-heterosexuality, indigenous or quilombola ethnicity, and/or disability. Thus, we realized the need to perceive these relationships intersectionally, considering that the researched scenario is multiple and diverse. Skill and demonstration of strength were requirements for more effective participation. However, it is worth reflecting on how much sports performance is necessary for teaching in school since the critical approaches of Physical Education state that its objective is to appropriate the knowledge of body culture in its entirety (^{Castellani Filho; Soares; Taffarel; Varjal; Escobar, 2009}) or open and expand the student's existential field from the perspective of moving Physical Education (^{Kunz, 2014}).

This scenario shows that there is still much to be done for women and men marked by ethnic diversity, different sexual orientations, multiple architectures, and body potential to actively participate in team sports courses in Physical Education teacher training. The results indicate that the hegemonic masculinity produced and reproduced by the sports canon is still cultivated in courses and reverberates from the school period to the initial training of teachers. However, it is necessary to deconstruct it, and the teacher training programs in Physical Education are simultaneously the central space of its production and the privileged locus of its collapse.

Finally, the relations of gender, power, and resistance that cross the disciplines of team sports suggest that feminist sports studies and gender studies must cross the construction of teacher training curricula. Above all, the teachers of the collective sports courses involved in the training process must appropriate such studies, reviewing their teaching strategies whose effects would result in an educational process permeated by inclusive and equitable knowledge and practices. Such practices would first be experienced in basic education as a cascading phenomenon. At the same time, questioning unequal relations strengthens the power relations between sports practices and teacher education, producing multiple resistances. Breaking essentialisms and operating with notions that multiply the possibilities of living masculinities and femininities is imperative for a human, inclusive, and equitable formation of teachers.