Holy Acceptable Violence? Violence in Hockey and Christian Atonement Theories
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’hockey et le christianitsme sont souvent considerer des activité spirituels pour leur disciples et participants. Cet essai, écrit d’une perspective morale féministe, examine plusieur type de violence qui caractérise l’hockey professionnel au Canada, incluent la justice économique, commodification et sexualization des athletes, dévouement et héroisme, dommages physiques au cours des jeux, l’abus sexuel, et une mentalité dualistique qui rend les autre joueurs non-humaines. Des parallèles entre ces type de violence et des théories chrétiennes classiques d’expiation sont établis, avec attention aux conséquences. Le normalité de la violence des théories chrétiennes classiques d’expiation et dans l’hockey professionnel au Canada est discuté et critiquer. Hockey and Christianity are described as ways of being spiritual for followers and participants. This essay is written from a feminist ethical perspective and examines violence characterizing professional Canadian hockey including: economic justice, and commodification and sexualization of athletes; self-sacrifice and heroism; on-ice bodily harms; sexual abuse; and a dualistic mentality that alienates and negates the other. Parallels between this violence and classical Christian atonement theories are drawn, with attention to consequences. The normativity of violence both in classical Christian atonement theories and in professional Canadian hockey is argued and critiqued.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.049 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".