“It is about discomfort and helplessness” – The hegemonic sports culture informed by the male gaze affecting karateka women’s embodied subjectivities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Karateka women may be characterized as masculine when viewed from the traditional martial culture and stereotyped and sexualized within the sports culture. These characterizations are gender binary organized. Women are in an arena assumed to be hegemonically masculine, with the male gaze guiding their performance as athletes and dictating expectations for their performativity as women. We carried out a study with the Spanish women's karate squad in preparation for the Tokyo Olympic Games, aiming to analyze how the hegemonic sports culture affects karateka women's embodied subjectivities through the diktats of the male gaze. The data generated with athletes and coaches, mainly through interviews carried out twice with each of them, informed processes of objectification and consumption of women in sport. Their athletic performance is devalued while, contradictorily, there is an apparent valuation of them through the sensualisation and sexualisation of their bodies. It is not valuation, though, since it keeps just favoring a desirous male gaze that, due to hegemony, addresses women as others. At times, athletes get lost in criticisms of one another, as data reported, but they are brave in being there, facing oppression daily, and becoming stronger. They often develop reflexivity and criticality of their situation, but it is not an easy task to be carried out alone. So, a community of practice among women is welcome as much as having the support of conscious men, those with greater understanding capacity, as they are internal to male culture.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".