MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W240765556

OUT ON THE FIELD: Gender, Sport and Sexualities/A LOT TO LEARN: Girls, Women and Education in the 20th Century

2006· article· en· W240765556 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Audrey R. Giles

Bibliographic record

VenueResources for feminist research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman sexualityGender studiesFeminismSociologyHarassmentPsychologySocial psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OUT ON THE FIELD: Gender, Sport and Sexualities Helen Jefferson Toronto: Women's Press, 2003; 174pp. A LOT TO LEARN: Girls, Women and Education the 20th Century Helen Jefferson Toronto: Women's Press, 2005; 181pp. Within the span of two years, Helen Jefferson produced two texts: Out on the Field: Gender, Sport and Sexualities (2003), and A Lot to Learn: Girls, Women and Education the 20th Century (2005). On the surface, these texts have little to do with each other: one examines sport and the other examines education. However, the texts both share insightful commentaries on issues of gender and sexuality, Lenskyj's intolerance of liberal feminism, and an easily accessible style. In Out on the Field, presents a text that is a collection of her previously published work, much of it having appeared feminist journals, including Resources for Feminist Research, Canadian Woman Studies, and Women Sport and Physical Activity Journal. Thus, some ways this text can be seen as a best of Lenskyj collection, one that draws on her wealth of knowledge the areas of homophobia and sexual harassment sport (Part I), (the inadequacy of) liberal feminist responses to issues of gender and sexuality sport (Part II), and (seemingly more acceptable) radical feminist analyses of sport and sexuality (Part III). While having a compilation of Lenskyj's work is a service to those interested her areas of expertise, the collection's format results an eclectic and at times disjointed text. The text would have benefited significantly from an introductory chapter that goes beyond the current two pages provides. Such an introduction would have contributed to an understanding of the context and significance of the work included this collection, which spans a period often years. In addition, a brief introduction to each section would provide much needed background information for the intended undergraduate audience, which, for example, would likely initially struggle to see the connections between sexual harassment and homophobic harassment or even ethnicity, sexuality, and gender. Of particular note Out of Bounds is Lenskyj's account of the ways which the Canadian Association for the Advancement of Women Sport and Physical Activity (CAAWS) attempted to manage its so-called image problem (i.e., association with lesbians) its early days. Also notable is Lenskyj's deconstruction of the claim that sport has become a safe place for lesbians, resulting the marginalization of heterosexual athletes. In response, points out that, in reality, sport is not necessarily a safe and comfortable place for lesbians, nor do all women's sporting practices necessarily challenge hegemonic femininity. Lesbians continue to be stigmatized, sexually harassed and silenced sport contexts, and women's sport continues to be co-opted, controlled and exploited the interests of patriarchal hegemony (p. 90). Cogent arguments, strong examples from across several decades, and introductions to terms such as hegemony, social construction, and the apologetic women's sport render this text appropriate for undergraduate audiences who have been well prepared drawing parallels between multiple sites of oppression. A Lot to Learn, Lenskyj's more recent work, utilizes the author's personal narratives and examples from her mother's life to examine girls and women's experiences of education from the early 1800s to the 1950s Rose Bay, Australia, and from the 1960s onwards Toronto. …

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.457
Threshold uncertainty score0.907

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.331 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResources for feminist researchSame topicSports, Gender, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207