A qualitative exploration of queer women’s relationship with the body and physical activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to traditional physical activity contexts being male-dominated, cis-heteronormative, and perpetuating Western beauty standards, LGBTQ+ individuals report higher rates of disengagement and lower rates of participation in physical activity, compared to their cis-heterosexual counterparts. Preliminary research has identified that queer women experience the lowest rates of physical activity participation, compared to other LGBTQ+ groups, yet no research to date has examined the intersections of sexual and gender identity with body image and physical activity behaviour. The present study investigated the relationship between queer women’s body image, physical activity behaviour, and experiences. A sample of N = 70 queer women aged 18-35 participated in one virtual 60–90-minute focus to discuss the intersections of body image, sexual and gender identity, and physical activity behaviour. Using reflexive thematic analysis, four themes were identified: The Queer Women’s Body is Political; (in)Visibility of Sexual and Gender Identity in Physical Activity; Hypervigilance to Maintain Safety and Reduce Perpetuating Gender-Based Violence; and Desire for Spaces that Foster Safety, Belonging, and Connection. Findings revealed that queer women’s body image impacts both participation in and enjoyment of physical activity. Further, the results highlighted the need for both queer-only and queer-friendly physical activity spaces to reduce hypervigilance towards the body and expressions of gender and sexual identity. This research contributes to the development and implementation of physical activity programming that is designed to promote safety, belonging, and social connection, with the goal of enhancing queer women’s enjoyment and continued engagement in physical activity.
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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".