From Alpha Athlete to Regretful Spectator: The Gendered and Heteronormative Story of My Sporting Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Much research has demonstrated the positive impact sport plays in individuals’ lives; however, there are gendered rates of participation. In particular, adolescent girls participate in sport at a lower rate than their male peers. The withdrawal from sport for adolescent girls has been linked to gender and heteronormativity but the current literature does not adequately explain the attrition rate. Therefore, utilizing autoethnography, this research studied the gendered and heteronormative sporting context, specifically the recreational sport inside and outside the school, of adolescent girls. My own memories, sport memorabilia, conversations with my parents, and present-day experiences have informed the creation of my narrative. The findings from my autoethnography support the notion that gender intensifies during adolescence and presses femininity and heterosexuality onto adolescent girls. Coupled together, gender ideology and heteronormativity influence the negotiation of sport participation through peers and perceived peer appraisals, and lead to specific behaviour to demonstrate appropriate gender and sexual orientation. Heterosexual adolescent girls and athletes are not guarded against the lesbian label, a prevalent and powerful description of female athletes as a result of the femininity/athleticism conflict. Described in this research were my motivations to avoid the label, as well as, the ways in which I did so. Given that gender intensifies during adolescence, these negotiations are occurring when identity formation processes are taking place, which has implications for impending adulthood and sport participation. As such, the withdrawal of adolescent girls from sport has implications for Canadian sport and policy provisions to create a positive and gender inclusive space for adolescent girls.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".