Gender Equality in Sports: The Struggle of Sportswomen for Equal Rights
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
Canada has long been committed to promoting gender equality in sports and has implemented various measures to ensure equal opportunities for women in sports. Some examples of entitlement-based policies include the 1981 Canada Gender Equality Act, the Pay Equity Act 2018 mandating that sports organizations provide equal pay for men and women, or government programs including the “Women in Coaching Canada Games Apprenticeship Program”. Furthermore, public campaigns in Canada, both governmental and by sports organizations, are making an effort to promote gender equality in the field of sports. Although various equality measures have been identified, gender inequality in sports still exists in Canada, which is evident through the disparity in pay, prominence in media, and limited availability of resources when compared to male athletes. Notable examples of the fight for gender equality include the problems faced by women’s hockey teams and the efforts of women’s soccer teams in 2023 to have salaries and training conditions comparable to those men enjoy. This chapter analyzes the current social and legal situation of female athletes in Canada. Its purpose is to provide an overview of the challenges encountered by female athletes and to examine the current existence of inequalities between males and females in Canadian sports, as well as to analyze the legal solutions advancing gender equality and their practical implementation.
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 | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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