Conspicuously Absent: An Analysis of the Introduction of Lightweight Women's Rowing into the 1996 Olympic Program
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction During the late 1980s and early 1990s, international rowing administrators began to discuss the introduction of lightweight events to the Olympic racing program. The international rowing federation (FISA) argued that lightweight rowing had long been in existence and deserved to be on the Olympic program because of its strict adherence to the rules of amateurism. (1) Furthermore, the first ever world champion, Ned Hanlan, was a lightweight rower at a svelte seventy-two kilograms, and men's lightweight rowing had been on the international racing program since 1974. (2) In 1985, FISA delegates met with International Olympic Committee (IOC) President Juan Antonio Samaranch to discuss their intention to include lightweight racing at the Olympic Games. Overly confident, the delegates were certain their request would be 'rubber stamped,' but the proposal lacked one significant component, the inclusion of lightweight women's events. If FISA submitted a request, Samaranch said, should be a complete one ... involving both men and women ... [given that] it was the IOC's intention to avoid any discrimination against (3) Having been Officially introduced to the international racing program in 1985, lightweight women's rowing remained innocuous. At less than fifty-nine kilograms, lightweight oarswomen's limited physical capacity, their smaller and lighter stature, defined views on the merit and importance of lightweight women's races. This paper examines the influence of late twentieth century beliefs and values on the perceived legitimacy of lightweight women's international rowing and how they impacted the introduction of lightweight women's rowing in the Olympic Games. Lightweight Women's International Rowing In the summer of 1984, FISA reluctantly permitted lightweight women's demonstration events to be held at the 10th FISA Championships for Lightweights in Montreal, Canada, despite several male and female rowing administrators' arguments that lightweight women's rowing did not deserve a place on the international racing program. (4) The biologically determined inferiority of oarswomen compared to their male counterparts was compounded by the fact that lightweight women were smaller, weaker, and their races were slower. Thus, not only were oarswomen considered substandard to male rowers, but also lightweight women were considered inferior to heavyweight women. FISA's limited recognition of lightweight women's competitive rowing not surprisingly had an impact on the ways in which others in the international rowing community perceived this discipline. As Foucault has suggested, the opinions of those who hold perceived expert knowledge, such as physicians and in this example sport administrators, become socially constructed discourses. (5) Thus, late twentieth century competitive international rowing discourse was able to dictate the value of lightweight women's rowing, or lack thereof, ensuring the marginalization of lightweight women in competitive international rowing. (6) One former Canadian lightweight oarswomen noted, would be times when we wouldn't be treated the same as the heavyweights. (7) She added: Women [were] not [considered] as good [as the men], and then ... [when] you're a lightweight woman, oh my gosh [that was considered worse]. And then there would be this sort of stigma, because you're making weight, because lightweight women are wacky and weird, it is true ... they go off the deep end all the time and lose it. But of course you'd lose it, you know if you didn't have a lot of food in your system [you would]. There would be a lot of heavyweight men or women who would lose it and no one would make a comment, but because you're a lightweight woman ... it's like oh, they were ... [the] wacky ones. (8) The physical limitations of lightweight women coupled with the perceived psychological side effects of continuous weight management rendered these women pariahs. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».