MIGRATION AND GENDER IDENTITY IN THE RURAL PHILIPPINES
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Remittances associated with labor migration have been hailed by many as the most direct form of development to rural migrant-sending areas of the Global South, but focusing only on the quantity of cash flows does little to contextualize how migration has transformed social structures in rural areas. Through a qualitative focus on divisions of agrarian labor and decision-making, this article illustrates how the out-migration of men from rural areas of the Philippines is challenging preexisting gender ideologies of agricultural labor. The article examines how wives “left-behind” by their migrant husbands negotiate forms of farm work and responsibility that are culturally prescribed as “masculine.” While a number of studies have detailed how female migration can destabilize conventional gender roles—as housebound husbands are shown to take up social reproductive work often considered “feminine”—the impacts of male migration on the participation of housebound wives in productive farming practices has been less studied. This article presents several vignettes of stay-at-home mothers who venture into farming and it analyzes how these women interpret their own gender identity. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am grateful to Mariedeth Abustan, Brian Villaverde, and Thatchenko Roussini Reyes for their assistance in the field. I also wish to thank Doracie Zoleta-Nantes, Philip Kelly, Cindy Fan, Rebecca Elmhirst, and Patrick Oabel, who offered constructive comments on an earlier draft of this article. Support for this research has been provided by The Challenges of the Agrarian Transition in Southeast Asia (ChATSEA) program, a major collaborative research initiative funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Notes 1. Castles and Miller 2008. 2. Rigg Citation2005, 174. 3. Eder Citation2006, 397; see also Breman and Mundle 1991; Rigg Citation1998; Mulder 1997. 4. Go 2002; Kelly Citation2000; Le Espiritu 2003. 5. Tyner Citation2004; Parreñas Citation2000; Asis Citation1995. 6. Bagasao Citation2007. 7. Levitt Citation1998, Citation2001; Pedraza 1991; Pertierra 1992. 8. Butler 1990, 34. 9. Ibid., 33. 10. Chant and Radcliffe 1992; Pedraza 1991; Margold Citation1995. 11. Chant and McIlwaine 1995. 12. Gibson, Law, and McKay Citation2001. 13. Ibid., 380. 16. Ibid. 14. McKay Citation2003. 15. McKay Citation2005, 89. 17. Kelly Citation2000. 18. Pingol Citation2001. 19. Ibid., 33. 20. Ibid., 35. 21. Connell 2001. 22. Pingol Citation2001, 251. 23. Pingol Citation2001; see also Asis Citation1995. 24. The most basic, community-level political unit of the Philippine governmental system; the primary planning and implementation unit of broader government programs. For a more in-depth account of the barangay's history, operation, and organization see Ayson and Abletez (Citation1985). 25. National Statistics Office Citation2007. 26. Municipalities in the Philippines are divided into income classes according to the average annual income during the last three calendar years. 27. For comprehensive analyses of agrarian reform in the Philippines, see Borras (2008) and Putzel and Cunnington (1989). 28. A more detailed discussion of the difficulties associated with assigning household headship and membership follows in the subsequent discussion. 29. While rice and coconut represented the two most prominent crops being grown by Lucbanins —both in terms of the number of hectares devoted to these crops, as well as their income contribution to local residents—a range of fruits and vegetables were also cultivated. Most common among these were bananas, balinghoy or kamoteng kahoy (cassava), kamote (sweet potato), sayote (a local pear-shaped vegetable), kalabasa (squash), and various “Chinese” vegetables, as they are locally referred to. These leafy green vegetables are varieties of what are commonly referred to as “bok-choy” or “Chinese cabbage” throughout North America. 30. Goss and Lindquist Citation1995, 328; see also Hart 1992. 31. Eder Citation2006, 400.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle