Introduction
The sociological imagination works by examining sociological issues that arise by evaluating all the different micro and macro sociological forces that have impacts on society and on the individuals in society Mills (1959), using biography with history helping to evaluate and see how P.E.D (performance enhancing drugs) are affecting the people in and around sport. Putting biography and history into context will help piece together the subjects by understanding what they mean, biography (life events of individual) and the history (timeline) this helps establish an understanding of PEDs impact on society in a broader view, showing what sociological issues can be assessed and help find the forces behind each issue.
Profit
Looking at the some of the influences presented, it is shown that winning is a major force, a motive and drive; delving deeper into winning we conclude money is one of the major reward for winning. These are seen as endorsements, contracts and advertisement opportunities that are very profitable and also sponsor individual players and teams in sports. These revenues influence and encourage individuals in sports to perform or use enhancements; these revenues give a higher social status in society’s class system (sociol stratification) that give the individuals power, property and prestige (weber’s theory), this is the dominant force that makes individuals achieve on the bases of winning. When looking other aspects of profit shows commercialisation as Horne (cited in Connor 2009) stated that the common argument of sociologists was that sports had been and is continually becoming more commercialised, this evidence shows commercialisation in sport is seen as a factor of mass profit in its agenda.
When looking at other profit influences shows the access to wealth for amateur athlete is influenced by other top athletes that have power, property and prestige. This means access to wealth is achievable when athletes are successful at a professional level this is a big motive to succeed. This shows that hegemonic masculinity factors as a influence on amateur athletes, who are brought up to achieve with high expectations, an example that can be given a such is Sir Donald Bradman who is seen as an hegemonic male which gives him the position of sociol dominance in the top hierarchy of society, this was of course through his success as one of the worlds most greatest cricketers Krieken et al (2014).
Delving deeper into Hegemonic masculinity in society shows that male athletes are influenced to be more stronger and more dominant, also shown to be less gentle or express any forms of femininity, this is also gives a gender socialization for what a typical males attributes should be in society. This influence has been imbedded into society from every male’s birth by the way males have been raised through social institutions and by their agents of socialisation. Looking deeper into gender shows sports discourages females to participate; this also shows other evidence that gender equality is almost non-existent in sports Washington and Karen (2001).
Looking at agents of socialisation shows coaches have a major personal influence on athletes as they push and drive them into trying other methods of improving their performance and extending their playing career, also not being judgmental on the use of drugs or even supplying PEDs to players. This evidence can stated by Waddington (cited in Connor 2009 p.339) `the drug-using athlete is normally part of a network of relationships with others, who may include team members, coaches, doctors, masseurs, trainers, managers or promoters, who are involved in supplying or administering doping substances, or in concealing their use’.
Deviance
Looking at the social impact on individual players who have been found using PEDs can be detrimental, as ess on other focusing more on rtain ways focusing more an one side of the picture and less on a all over informed