Sharing our strengths: findings from a women’s community building project using muay Thai
Bibliographic record
Abstract
[EN] While women’s involvement in Muay Thai, a martial art from Thailand, has been increasing worldwide, research to date is still limited, and has predominantly focused on competitive training (e.g., Davies & Deckert, 2019) and experiences in training camps in Thailand (e.g., Maris, 2022). Research on women’s experiences learning martial arts in general has raised concerns over the impacts of traditional hierarchies, hegemonic and hyper-masculinities, and gender norms making women and learners with diverse gender identities do not feel welcome, potentially contributing to early attrition rates (Lindsay et al., 2023; Turelli et al., 2025). Pedagogical innovations to promote gender equity and supportive learning environments are needed to improve women’s experiences in martial arts (Rodrigues et al., 2023). This is confirmed by Channon (2018), who identifies intentional pedagogical action as necessary for challenging problematic gender issues in martial arts. Accordingly, feminist (Nichols et al., 2023) and gender-responsive (Verry & McKay, 2024) approaches are emerging to provide avenues for reimagining women’s engagement in martial arts. The present research contributes to filling several gaps by exploring women’s recreational (Channon & Matthews, 2015) learning of Muay Thai, using a feminist pedagogical approach, for the purposes of building solidarity through intercultural and transformative community development between new immigrant women in Canada.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".