Sportif·ves trans, perspectives cis : les athlètes trans sous le regard sensationnaliste de la presse française
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La présence des athlètes trans dans les sports, bien qu’elle soit l’objet de vives controverses, demeure négligée dans le domaine des études de genre, du sport et des médias. Au croisement de ces disciplines, l’article est basé sur une analyse sociodiscursive de 86 articles publiés dans la presse française entre 1977 et 2020. À la lumière des théories trans, les auteurs montrent que les athlètes trans font l’objet d’une représentation cis-sensationnaliste reposant sur quatre mécanismes : 1) le mythe de la première personne trans; 2) la mise en scène de la transition; 3) la banalisation de l’exclusion; 4) l’occultation des conditions de vie. Une des conséquences de ce traitement médiatique pour les athlètes trans est la contrainte à justifier leur existence, leur transition et leur place dans le sport. Selon les auteurs, il est primordial de prendre en considération le rôle de la presse dans la reconduction de l’oppression cisgenriste envers les sportif·ves trans.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".