Canadian national sport organizations’ safe sport policies: are pregnant and parenting athletes included?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Safe sport policies, sometimes referred to as safeguarding policies, have rapidly increased internationally, highlighting a global movement to combat maltreatment in sport. In Canada, there has been a surge in National Sport Organisations’ (NSOs) safe sport policies; however, researchers have found that these policies lack equity-owed perspectives and are hyper-focused on sexual violence. Lost in these policy gaps is the equity-owed group of pregnant and parenting elite athletes (PPEAs) who are self-identified women, transgender (trans) men and non-binary people (SWTMNB). Therefore, we examined Canadian NSOs’ safe sport policies for the manifestation of dominant discourses surrounding gender, pregnancy and parenting and to understand how they influence the safe sport support available for SWTMNB PPEAs. Guided by feminist methodologies, we engaged in archival research to collect policies relating to safe sport from all 64 Canadian NSOs, totalling 426 policies. We analysed the policies using Allan (2008, 2009) feminist poststructuralist discourse analysis, which produced three overarching discourses: i) maltreatment occurs mainly to minors, ii) athletes are not parents in equity and inclusion policies and iii) PPEAs do not need proactive support to create a safe sport environment. Our findings illustrated how dominant discourses related to age, gender and parenting were woven throughout Canadian NSOs’ policies, serving as technologies of domination to determine who is (and is not) protected under safe sport policies. To conclude, we provide several suggestions for how NSOs and policymakers can update their safe sport policies to consider the safety of SWTMNB PPEAs.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".