Professional women footballers’ stories of marketing portrayals and sponsorship: “I just had to feel grateful for what I’ve been given”
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we investigate the marketing portrayal and sponsorship experiences of professional women athletes. Specifically, we examine the perspectives of professional women footballers (i.e. soccer) and the ways in which the gender ideal is reproduced, negotiated, and resisted, as well as their (re)imagined equitable sporting future. Using critical feminist narrative inquiry, twelve interviews were conducted with four professional women footballers. Four themes were constructed that call attention to: 1) the lack of commercial sponsorship that limits career growth; 2) performative partnerships that perpetuate inequities; 3) objectifying women athletes through labour exploitation; and 4) limited agency restricts resistance and transformation potential. The findings challenge the concept of sponsorship “partnerships” and expose an exploitative off-pitch reality for women athletes. This study highlights the need for systemic change in professional football for all women to be perceived as legitimate and worthy of investment.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it